Theories of Inequality: Marx and Weber - Term Paper Example

Marx vs. Weber Student’s Name Professor Subject University/Institution 16th August, 2012. Introduction In sociology, social inequality refers to individuals who belong to the same society and have different social status, social class and social circles (Giddens, 1991. pp. 10). Social inequality has been a widely debated topic among socialists with theorists like Karl Marx and Max Weber disagreeing on issues for instance classes of social inequality in the society. To bring the subject closer home, modern day social inequality manifest itself through aspects like transportation accessibility, different voting rights, different housing, difference in accessing education, travelling, and health care are some of the ways through which social inequalities in a society manifests itself. Inequality can also manifest itself in families and neighbourhoods where job satisfaction, occupation and credit access among others is not equal. Social inequalities vary, are broad and far reaching according to race, classes and countries. The paper therefore is an analysis of social inequality with a major focus on two theorists; Marx and Weber. Karl Marx Theory of Inequality versus Max Weber Theory of Inequality Similarities Foundation of both Marx’s and Weber’s ideas in their theories was ruled by individual abstractions. For example in feudalism, Marx’s was for the opinion that people sold their properties for their value and not for profit (Marx & Engles, 1985. Pp. 65). Weber’s form of feudalism explanations was that private property was as a result of military violence within a political structure. Marx also explained feudalism as a means of production within the economic structure. Both Marx and Weber acknowledged that there is social inequality in the society. Marx acknowledged that social inequality is as a result of some owning the factors of production while Weber thinks that social inequalities are brought by power, property or wealth and prestige Bendix, 1962 pp.52). While the theorists may have differed on what brought social inequality, there is no doubt that their ideologies contributes significantly to modern day understanding of inequality and a basis for which other theorists have based their ideas on for instance, the Weberians and the Marxists. It also shows that the concept of stratification continues to advance as societies advance, that is, when Marx was advocating his ideas, the ideas were simplified to who owned the factors of production and who did not and hence stratification (Rockmore, 2002 pp. 128). Weber class stratification was as a result of power, prestige and wealth. Modern day class stratification may be brought by many issues, for instance, different types of schools, medical accessibility, houses, incomes and power among others but nonetheless draws basic concepts of social stratification from earlier theorists, Marx and Weber. Weber and Marx shared the common belief that capitalism was founded on irrationality and tried to understand it in religion medium, even though it had different significances. Weber argued that the key origin of capitalism was from religion (Bendix, 1962, pp. 52). Capitalism instilled faith in the Protestants and they greatly valued hard work. Marx believed that religion was just a method which was used to spread ruling to the working class. Although Marx’s and Weber’s opinions were parallel to each other and the only difference that separated them is that, Weber believed that God dominated individual actions while Marx argued that capital controlled the individual’s actions. Marx’s argued that, in social classes, middle class was part of dictators because they had a role of helping the capitalists. This view is also similar to Weber’s, who viewed social class as being formed as a result of  locating the market but he added that, what brought the difference between the working classes and the middle classes was only the level of skills and knowledge that made the middle class  useful to the dictators. Differences In regard to Karl Marx, society has evolved through four epochs namely, primitive communism, ancient society, feudal society and the capitalist society with only the primitive communism being the only society that was free from social stratification (Giddens, 1991. pp. 52). Social stratification started when people started to specialise in production and hence agriculture gained importance and the inequalities started to surface. The second epoch consisted of people like patricians, knights and the slaves. The feudal society consisted of people for instance, the feudal lords, apprentices and the serfs who had moved into the society and had capitalised in assuming the factors of production. The fourth epoch, the capitalist society consists of the bourgeoisies and the proletariats. Through following Marx’s explanations of human developments where one epoch gradually replaced the other one, Marx’s idea was that capitalism slowly developed through historical materialism and in gradual process. Weber on the other hand approaches capitalism in a different dimension whereby, the materialism development proposed by Marx does not apply to Weber’s theory (Mehring, 2003 pp. 47). According to Weber, people developed the desire to accumulate wealth since they already knew that their fate was already predetermined. That is the proletariats already knew that the bourgeoisies already controlled the factors of production and hence their fate was preset and their interest continued into accumulating wealth (Bendix, 1962, pp. 90). According to Marx, the solution to social inequality lay in the proletariats developing consciousness and realising that they were being exploited by their bosses and hence form a global revolution which would see them owning the factors of production like their bosses owned for there would be equality (Marx & Engles, 1985. Pp. 50). However, Weber disagrees with Karl Marx that revolution was the only way through which capitalism could be solved. However, Weber is silent as to the solution of capitalism. However, the differences in the approaches of the two theorists’ regarding social inequality in the society can also be attributed to the time periods that the two theorists were advocating for their ideas (Bendix, 1962, pp. 70). Karl Marx advocated his theory at a time there were world uprisings that sought to do away with capitalism while Weber advocated his theories when there was economic maturity and maybe the reason as to why he thought that a revolution would not solve capitalism.  Marx strongly focused on economic influences while Weber was basing his argument on political influences. Marxist argued that, the factory owners who were the dictators exploited the workers by paying them with the remains of profit from the factories. He also argued that, due to power concentration in the ruling class (dictators) they used that power to exploit the workers (proletariats) for their own benefit.  According to Marx’s theory, he agreed about the importance of state but argued that the state always protected the dictators in order to make the rich happy. Weber, on the other hand focused on political influences because he argued that the economic power could not explain the class system (Bendix, 1962, pp. 96). Marx’s and Weber theories started to differ when it comes to stratification because Weber discussed his ideas basing them on status group. These status groups were different from classes due to the community which was surrounding them.  Weber’s view is that the societies can be divided into status groups. In the contribution of the theories to modern day social inequalities of class, gender, race and power, Marx’s theory is out of context in regard to the developments of the modern day society. The proletariats (the working class) has continued to become more educated and hence sharpening their job skills and with the skills, the workers are becoming financially well off. In addition, the emergence of workers unions and labor laws which are all meant to protect the workers from exploitation are the characteristic of the modern day worker and hence the issue of revolution to liberalise the worker is out of context with modern times. On the other hand, taking a closer look at Weber’s theory, owning the factors of production is one of the ways through which one acquires social class and not purely a way through which social class is attained (Weber 1978 pp. 32). Weber tends to advocate that workers who have more skills are paid more and hence they can also achieve social class (Bendix, 1962, pp. 85). Weber advocated that, while wealth for instance owning the factors of production could make one have a social class, prestige on the other hand can also bring social class which the workers nowadays are boasting of. Hence, Marx theory when compared to Weber’s theory simplifies the whole process of social inequality. Marx’s and Weber have many differences when it comes to their views on social classes. Marx’s discussed greatly on structures and he believed that, structures were used to govern behaviours and also to control the modes of production. On the other hand Weber did not see the influence of structures in defining social classes but argued that social classes were as a result of individuals’ behaviours. Marx view social grouping as being created around the class alone (Mehring, 2003 pp. 75) but Weber questioned his view arguing that he was unable to define the groups which were formed because of social inequalities. Marx’s viewed social relations as a result of economic exploitation but Weber says that class relations are very strong and economic conflicts were only the struggle that comes between the superior person and the inferior person. Marx’s argues that, the individual connections with production is what brings class divisions, whereas in Weber’s views, people organize themselves so that they can get access to the market place, thus the individual role in social class formation mattered (Bendix, 1962, pp. 86). Marx’s and Weber also differed on their opinion about the division of labor. Marx’s says industrialization brought co-operation which later changed and became complex co-operation.  Marx’s argues that, skilled labourers were combined together in the division of labor which made them to loss their skills and also to be separated from their work. Division of labor was not good because it forced men to work into system which later created conflicting classes (Weber 1978 pp. 25). Weber on the other hand argued that, labor division was positive because it enabled people to form many classes. Labor division allowed individuals to nature their skills unlike Marx’s who viewed the division of labor as a denial movement to individual’s skills. Conclusion In the days when Marx and Weber were advocating their ideas on social stratification, their ideas were very relevant. However, times have changed and so is the issue of social stratification approached differently. For instance, societies continue to be stratified, there are those societies that are highly developed while others societies especially in developing countries remains backwards. With globalization, people have different access to education, jobs and hospitals among others. Countries are no longer at stand point, for some have developed more than the others, there are those which are already developed, others are developing and others are still to develop. Therefore, the issue of social stratification continues to proliferate out society even more in modern day times. The theories can therefore be said to have become outdated (Giddens, 1991. pp. 45), passed by time for their explanation of social stratification still stands more defined in the globalised world. References Bendix, R. 1962. Max Weber: An Intellectual Portrait. New York: Anchor Books. Giddens, A. (1991). Sociology. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers Ltd Marx, K. & Engles, F. (1985). The Communist Manifesto. Melbourne: Penguin Books Australia. Mehring, F. (2003). Karl Marx: The Story of His Life. New York, Routledge. Rockmore, T. (2002). Marx after Marxism: the Philosophy of Karl Marx. New York. John Wiley & Sons. Weber, M. (1978). Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Socioloy. Edited by Guenther Roth and Claus Wittich. Berkeley: University of California Press. Read More