Question

Discuss Marx’s class analysis including class struggle and how the class structure is maintained.  Discuss the various elements of Weber’s theory of inequality. In what ways is Weber’s theory different from and similar to Marx’s theory?

Answer 1

Qs 1. Discuss Marx’s class analysis including class struggle and how the class structure is maintained?

Ans 1. Karl Marx (1818-1883) was a creative thinker who made a scientific interpretation of human history.

From the stage of hunters and nomads, mankind turned to the stage of settled living. Hunting, fruit gathering and sheep rearing gave way to domesticating of animals and private agriculture. Then came urban culture and rich diversity of vocations population increased, inhibiting factors weakened, private property emerged, and we reached a stage when Private means of production could also be refined in a hundred ways. This led to the formation of economic classes. Subsequently, the Industrial Revolution in 1779 gave birth to the capitalism and thereby emerged the classes of haves and have-nots.

As per Marx, there was a class of employees and another of the employed. In other words, exploiters versus exploited. He considered that society, especially the feudal and capitalist society, has two major economic classes, the rich and the poor. The rich were those who possess the modes of production (land and factories etc.) and earned profit by exploiting the labourers and the environment (resources).

Now, let’s see how the class structure is maintained and why are there continuous struggles between classes.

Marx defined a social class as all those people who share a common relationship to the means of economic production. Those who own and control the means of production (slave owners, feudal landowners or owners of property such as factories and capital) are the dominant class.

The owner of modes of production has the freedom to offer employment and the workers, being too poor, cannot resist the terms the employer’s offer. Thus, the workers by contract sell their energy, skill and will to work in return for agreed wages. Under this system, the owner of means of production retains the right to terminate the contract of employment at their sole discretion.

The profit earned by the rich led to the process of capital accumulation. In consequence to this, the poor workers (labour class) try to accumulate labour, the only commodity they possess, through rapid population growth. Improvements in the technology of production and rapid growth of population among the poor workers lead to surplus labour and unemployment. This is the main cause of misery, unemployment, undernourishment and poverty in the society. The population of the poor grows at a faster pace as compared to the rich and ultra-rich, which are in a small proportion and possess almost all the modes of production. With the passage of time, there occur new innovations in the methods of production, the improved technology renders the growing population of poor people unemployed, which sharpens and intensifies class struggle.

Just to reiterate, he asserted that on the top is, and has been, the ruling class, small in numbers but unchallenged in authority and power. They exercise power because of their ownership of means of production. In an industrial society the means of production include the factories, and the machinery and raw materials used for manufacturing goods. Marx called them the class of ‘Bourgeoisie’ or capitalists or owners of property

And down below is that large body of the masses which lives in utter misery and is content to be exploited. All those who work for dominant class are — slaves, peasants, or industrial labourers. They constitute the subordinate class. Marx called this class — the ‘proletariat’ or the labour class or working class or poor class. Members of the proletariat own only their labour which they hire out to the owners of industry in return for wages.

The relationship between these two classes is not only one of dominance and subordination but also of ‘exploitation’. The workers produce more wealth in the form of food, manufactured products and services than is necessary to meet their basic needs. The capitalists are a non-producing class. They do not actually produce anything. Still much of the wealth produced by the proletariats is taken away by the capitalists. According to Marx, this kind of exploitation has been the main source of conflict between the two classes throughout history.

Just to Summarise, overall, there are six elements in Marx's view of class conflict.

• Classes are authority relationships based on property ownership.
• A class defines groupings of individuals with shared life situations, thus interests.
• Classes are naturally hostile by their interests.
• Imminent within modern society is the growth of two antagonistic classes and their struggle, which eventually absorbs all social relations.
• Political organization and Power is an instrumentality of class struggle, and reigning ideas are its reflection.
• Structural change is a consequence of the class struggle.

Qs 2. Discuss the various elements of Weber’s theory of inequality.

Ans 2. Max Weber is known as one of the founders of sociology. Weber’s theory of inequality has primarily three elements, i.e. relationship between class, status and party.

Status is related to inequalities that are to do with the way in which people judge and relate to each other.

Class is to do with inequalities that have their source in the workings of capitalism and the market place.

Party is related to concepts of politics, meaning people form groups and organisations to look after their own interests, leading to inequalities.

Weber identified four different 'constellations' of class:

•        The dominant property-owning and commercial class

•        The white-collar intelligentsia

•        The petty bourgeoisie (owners of small businesses)

•        The manual working class.

These different class groupings have distinct market situations which either privilege them or make them more vulnerable. Weber introduced the important sociological concept of life chances which refer to the opportunities (or lack of them) individuals have for success in education, employment, housing, health, etc. Within the market economy property less individuals depend upon the skills they can offer, and the relative scarcity of these skills improves their market position. For this reason, the highly qualified have a different class situation from those with no qualifications.

Weber's theory of social class inequality is based on the view that class divisions and inequalities reflect different life chances in the market and that a person's class position is determined by the job market. Because such markets serve to divide and subdivide classes, the result is differentiation between groups of employees becomes increasingly complex.

Weber's key point is that within class there is further differentiation in terms of status that reflects the different amounts of social standing individuals and groups have. Weber's analysis of status and market position can usefully explain social differences in society. For example, in the workplace women, the disabled, the elderly and many minority ethnic minority groups have found themselves discriminated against, irrespective of their class position. Therefore, people occupying the same class position may well be distinguished by differences in status. For the individual, their status may be more significant than class as a source of identity. Weber thus sees class, status and party as cross-cutting.

Weber's approach is useful precisely because it allows us to describe the complex reality of contemporary society.

Qs 3. In what ways is Weber’s theory different from and similar to Marx’s theory?

Ans 3. Both Marx and Weber, agree that ownership of property and the value of labour are key causes of class stratification or inequality.

Marx puts his emphasis on property ownership, while Weber focuses on labour value.

Weber presents a view of society as becoming split into smaller groups or increasingly fragmented, in contrast to Marx's prediction of an increasingly polarized society. Karl Marx believed that the social classes would polarise, with some people becoming ever more rich and powerful while others would become poorer. Weber said that there would be ever more social classes developing in capitalist society. Class would depend on our life chances and our life styles. Class would be characterised by such things as accents, education, locality, leisure habits and spending.

Marx sees the role of a capitalist government as protecting the bourgeoisie property rights and Weber sees it as introducing bureaucracy to stand between the bourgeoisie and their exploitation of the workers.

Weber, unlike Marx, takes a multi causal approach when explaining social phenomena. We can see this multi causal approach at work (as mentioned above) in Weber's treatment of class. Non-economic factors such as 'family background', 'educational attainment' and 'culture/beliefs' are important causal factors in the determination of class. Weber refuses to tie 'status' or 'party' too closely or necessarily to class.

Weber emerges as the better theorist, because he can explain more of the complexities of modern stratification, while Marx is seen to reduce everything down to one fundamental model based on his own analysis of capitalism as exploitation.

Weber's theories on class and stratification show that other dimensions of stratification, besides class, strongly influence people's lives. Marx's attempt at a formal definition usefully indicates the social bases of class; this approach fails to take adequate account of all the other classes that exist in society.

The Weberian perspective gives credibility to the importance of ideas in social life and in my view, provides a better explanation for class in a contemporary society.

Hope the aforementioned is free of any ambiguity and is useful to you.

Thanks