Sociological Theory:

II
Karl Marx

"The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles”.

Capitalism and Class conflict: (Read Only)

"The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles”. With these
words, Marx and his collaborator, Friedrich Engels, began their best-known statement, the
Manifesto of the Communist Party. Industrial capitalism, like earlier types of society, contains
two major social classes-the ruling class, whose members (capitalists or bourgeoisie) own
productive property, and the oppressed (proletarians), who sell their labour. Like masters and
slaves in the ancient world and like nobles and serfs in feudal systems, capitalists and
proletarians are engaged in class conflict today. Currently, as in the past, one class controls
the other as productive property.

Capitalist Reaction: (Read Only)

How would the capitalists react? Their wealth made them strong. But Marx saw a weakness in
the capitalist armour. Motivated by a desire for personal gain, capitalists feared competition
with other capitalists. Marx predicted, therefore, that capitalists would be slow to band together
despite their common interests. In addition, he reasoned, capitalists kept employees' wages
low in order to maximize profits, which made the workers' misery grow ever greater. In the long
run, Marx believed, capitalists would bring about their own undoing.

END

Capitalism and Alienation: (Important) (Past Paper) (Part of Conflict

Theory)
The concept of alienation was first articulated by Marx in his Economic and Philosophic
Manuscripts of 1844. He condemned capitalist society for producing alienation, the
experience of isolation and misery resulting from powerlessness. To the capitalists, workers
are nothing more than a source of labour, to be hired and fired at will. Dehumanized by their
jobs (repetitive factory work in the past and processing orders on a computer today), workers
find little satisfaction and feel unable to improve their situation. Here we see another
contradiction of capitalist society: As people develop technology to gain power over the world,
the capitalist economy gains more control over people.
 Marx noted four ways in which capitalism alienates workers:
1. Alienation from the act of working. Ideally, people work to meet their needs and to develop
their personal potential. Capitalism, however, denies workers a say in what they make or how
they make it. Further, much of the work is a constant repetition of routine tasks. The fact that
today we replace workers with machines whenever possible would not have surprised Marx.
As far as he was concerned, capitalism had turned human beings into machines long ago.

2. Alienation from the products of work. The product of work belongs not to workers but to
capitalists, who sell it for profit. Thus, Marx reasoned, the more of themselves workers invest
in their work, the more they lose.

3. Alienation from other workers. Through work, Marx claimed, people build bonds of
community, Industrial capitalism, however, makes work competitive rather than cooperative,
setting each person apart from everyone else and offering little chance for human
companionship.

4. Alienation from human potential. Industrial capitalism alienates workers from their human
potential. Marx argued that a worker "does not fulfil himself in his work but denies himself, has
a feeling of misery rather than well-being, does not freely develop his physical and mental
energies, but is physically exhausted and mentally debased. The worker, therefore, feels
himself to be at home only during his leisure time, whereas at work he feels homeless". In
short, industrial capitalism turns an activity that should express the best qualities in human
beings into a dull and dehumanizing experience,
Marx viewed alienation, in its various forms, as a barrier to social change. But he hoped that
industrial workers would overcome their alienation by uniting into a true social class, aware of
the cause of their problems and ready to change society.

Critical Review:
Marx was surely a profound thinker but his predictions have not withstood the test of time.
Although capitalist markets have changed over the past 150 years, competition has not
devolved into monopoly. Real wages have risen and profit rates have not declined. Free-
market economies lift the masses from poverty and create the necessary institutional
conditions for overall political freedom.
Socialist revolutions, to be sure, have occurred throughout the world, but never where Marx’s
theory had predicted—in the most advanced capitalist countries. On the contrary, socialism
was forced on poor, so-called Third World countries. And those revolutions condemned the
masses to systemic poverty and political dictatorship.

END

Revolution: (Part of Conflict Theory) (Marx’s Solution)

According to Marx, as the socio-economic conditions worsened for the proletariat, they would
develop a class consciousness that revealed their exploitation at the hands of the wealthy
capitalist class of bourgeoisie, and then they would revolt, demanding changes to smooth the
conflict. Also, if the changes made to appease conflict maintained a capitalist system, then the
cycle of conflict would repeat. However, if the changes made created a new system, like
socialism, then peace and stability would be achieved.
The only way out of the trap of capitalism, Marx argued, is to remake society. He imagined a
system of production that could provide for the social needs of all, He called this system
socialism. Although Marx knew that such a dramatic change would not come easily. He was
convinced that capitalism was a social evil, he believed that in time the working majority would
realize they held the key to a better future. This change would certainly be revolutionary and
perhaps even violent, Marx believed a socialist society would bring class conflict to an end.
However, Marx failed to foresee that the revolution he imagined could take the form of
repressive regimes, such as Stalin's government in the Soviet Union, that would end up killing
tens of millions of people. But in his own time, Marx looked toward the future with hope: "The
proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win"

END

Critical Review: (Memorize)

Marx has had enormous influence on socio logical thinking. But his revolutionary ideas-calling
for the overthrow of capitalist society-also make his work highly controversial.
One of the strongest criticisms of Marxism is that it denies a central idea of the Davis-Moore
thesis: that a system of unequal rewards is necessary to place talented people in the right jobs
and to motivate them to work hard, Marx separated reward from performance; his egalitarian
ideal was based on the principle "from each according to his ability; to each according to his
needs". However, failure to reward individual performance may be precisely what caused the
low productivity of the former Soviet Union and other socialist economies around the world.
Defenders of Marxism respond to such criticism by asking why we assume that humanity is
inherently selfish rather than social, noting that individual rewards are not the only way to
motivate people to perform their social roles.
A second problem is that the revolutionary change Marx predicted has failed to happen, at
least in advanced capitalist societies.

END

Why No Marxist Revolution? (Memorize if you get time otherwise just

memorize the headings and counterpart)
Despite Marx's prediction, capitalism is still thriving. Why have industrial workers not
overthrown capitalism? Ralf Dahrendorf suggested four reasons:
1. The fragmentation of the capitalist class. Today, millions of stockholders, rather than single
families, own most large companies. Day-to-day corporate operations are in the hands of a
large class of managers, who may or may not be major stockholders. With stock widely held -
about 40 percent of U.S. adults own stocks-more and more people have a direct stake in the
capitalist system.

2. A higher standard of living. A century ago, most workers were in factories or on farms
employed in blue-collar occupations. Today, most workers are engaged in white-collar
occupations, higher-prestige jobs that involve mostly mental activity. These jobs are in sales,
management, and other service fields. Most of today's white-collar workers do not think of
themselves as an "industrial proletariat,". Most of today's workers are far better off than workers
were a century ago, an example of structural social mobility. One result of this rising standard
of living is that people are more willing to accept the status quo.

3. More worker organizations. Workers today have the right to form labour unions, to make
demands of management, and to back up their demands with threats of work slowdowns and
strikes. As a result, labour disputes are settled without threatening the capitalist system.

4. Greater legal protections. Over the past century, the government passed laws to make
workplaces safer. In addition, unemployment insurance, disability protection, and Social
Security now provide workers with greater financial security.

A counterpart:
These developments suggest that the society has smoothed many of capitalism's rough edges.
Yet many observers claim that Marx's analysis of capitalism is still largely valid. First, wealth
remains highly concentrated, with the wealthiest 1 percent of the world’s population now
owns more than half of the world’s wealth, according a Credit Suisse report. Second,
many of today's white-collar jobs offer no more income, security, or satisfaction than factory
work did a century ago, Third, many benefits enjoyed by today's workers came about through
the class conflict Marx described. Workers still struggle to hold on to what they have, and in
recent years, many workers have actually lost pensions and other benefits. Fourth, although
workers have gained some legal protections, ordinary people still face disadvantages that the
law cannot overcome. Therefore, social-conflict theorists conclude, the absence of a socialist
revolution in the society does not mean that Marx was wrong about capitalism.

END
False Consciousness: (Memorize if you get time) (Related to conflict
theory)
Another idea that Marx developed is the concept of false consciousness. False
consciousness is a condition in which the beliefs, ideals, or ideology of a person are not in the
person’s own best interest. In fact, it is the ideology of the dominant class (here, the bourgeoisie
capitalists) that is imposed upon the proletariat. Ideas such as the emphasis of competition
over cooperation, or of hard work being its own reward, clearly benefit the owners of industry.
Therefore, workers are less likely to question their place in society and assume individual
responsibility for existing conditions.

Class Consciousness: (Memorize if you get time) (Related to conflict

Theory)
In order for society to overcome false consciousness, Marx proposed that it be replaced
with class consciousness, the awareness of one’s rank in society. Instead of existing as a
“class in itself,” the proletariat must become a “class for itself” in order to produce social
change, meaning that instead of just being an inert strata of society, the class could become
an advocate for social improvements. Only once society entered this state of political
consciousness would it be ready for a social revolution.

END

Conflict Theory: (Important) (Memorize)

The conflict theory, suggested by Karl Marx, claims society is in a state of perpetual conflict
because of competition for limited resources. It holds that social order is maintained by
domination and power, rather than consensus and conformity. According to conflict theory,
those with wealth and power try to hold on to it by any means possible, chiefly by suppressing
the poor and powerless. A basic premise of conflict theory is that individuals and groups
within society will work to maximize their own benefits.

According to Karl Marx "A house may be large or small; as long as the neighboring
houses are likewise small, it satisfies all social requirement for a residence. But let
there arise next to the little house a palace, and the little house shrinks to a
hut." Wage Labour and Capital (1847)

Society and Production:

According to Marx, the early decades of industrial capitalism in Europe, turned a small part of
the population into capitalists (bourgeoisie), people who own and operate factories and other
businesses in pursuit of profits. A capitalist tries to make a profit by selling a product for more
than it costs to produce. Capitalism turns most of the population into industrial workers, whom
Marx called proletarians, people who sell their labour for wages, To Marx, a system of
capitalist production always ends up creating conflict between capitalists and workers. To keep
profits high, capitalists keep wages low. But workers want higher wages. Since profits and
wages come from the same pool of funds, the result is conflict. As Marx saw it, this conflict
could end only with the end of capitalism itself.

Social Institutions and Materialism: (Historical Materialism)

All societies are composed of social institutions, the major spheres of social life, organized to
meet human needs, Examples of social institutions include the economy, the political system,
the family, religion, and education. In his analysis of society, Marx argued that one institution-
the economy-dominates aIl the others and defines the true nature of a society. Drawing on the
philosophical approach called materialism, which says that how humans produce material
goods shapes their experiences, Marx believed that the other social institutions all operate in
a way that supports a society's economy. According to Marx, the economy is a society’s “real
foundation”. Marx maintained that every part of a society supports the economic system.

Karl Marx and Conflict Theory:

Karl Marx asserted that all elements of a society’s structure depend on its economic structure.

END

Conflict Theory Assumptions: (Memorize if you get time, otherwise just memorize the
headings)

In current conflict theory, there are four primary assumptions which are helpful to understand:
competition, revolution, structural inequality, and war.
Competition:
Conflict theorists believe that competition is a constant and, at times, overwhelming factor in
nearly every human relationship and interaction. Competition exists as a result of the scarcity
of resources, including material resources like money, property, commodities, and more.
Beyond material resources, individuals and groups within a society also compete for
intangible resources as well. These can include leisure time, dominance, social status, sexual
partners, and many other factors as well. Conflict theorists assume that competition is the
default, rather than cooperation.

Revolution:
Given conflict theorists' assumption that conflict occurs between social classes, one outcome
of this conflict is a revolution. The idea is that change in a power dynamic between groups
does not happen as the result of adaptation. Rather, it comes about as the effect of conflict
between these groups.

Structural Inequality:
An important assumption of conflict theory is that human relationships and social structures
all experience inequalities of power. In this way, some individuals and groups inherently
develop more power and reward than others. Following this, those individuals and groups that
benefit from a particular structure of society tend to work to maintain those structures so as to
retain and enhance their power.

War:
Conflict theorists tend to see war as either a unifier or as a cleanser of societies. In conflict
theory, war is the result of a cumulative and growing conflict between individuals and groups
and between whole societies. In the context of war, a society may become unified in some
ways, but conflict still remains between multiple societies. On the other hand, war may also
result in the wholesale end of society.

Bailouts:
Conflict theorists point to the financial crisis of 2008 and the subsequent bank bailouts as
good examples of real-life conflict theory, according to authors Alan Sears and James
Cairns in their book A Good Book, in Theory. They view the financial crisis as the inevitable
outcome of the inequalities and instabilities of the global economic system, which enables the
largest banks and institutions to avoid government oversight and take huge risks that only
reward a select few.

Sears and Cairns note that large banks and big businesses subsequently received bailout
funds from the same governments that claimed to have insufficient funds for large-scale
social programs such as universal health care. The rich got the help they needed but the poor
got nothing.

Criticism: (Memorize)
Conflict theory has been criticized because it tends to focus on conflict to the exclusion of
recognizing stability. Many social structures are extremely stable or have gradually progressed
over time rather than changing abruptly as conflict theory would suggest.

END

Is conflict theory… right? (Read Only)

Marx believed that with rising inequality, social tension also rises. That much seems to be right,
as a mountain of studies show that social and economic inequality are very dangerous to
society. The theory is that if the wealth gap becomes too wide, social unrest will ensue — and
that is pretty much what we’re observing in society at the moment.
But many things cannot be explained through this lens alone, and there is another, equally
convincing and opposite theory: functionalism. Whereas conflict theory views all aspects
of life as a competition, functionalism understands society as a system striving for
equilibrium.

To say that conflict theory is right or wrong would simply not be correct. Sociologists develop
theories to help explain social phenomena. These theories often work at multiple levels, from
the macro to the micro. However, such theories are dependent on context and specific to
certain situations, so it is dangerous to over-generalize. Simply put, conflict theory is not the
be-all-end-all of human society, but it can be a useful lens through which we can view the world.

The fact that Marx and his work are still so influential to this day is a testament to his value as
a philosopher and an economist. However, Marx also paved the way for socialism and
communism to emerge, with devastating consequences for millions of people. Blindly believing
in such ideas and ignoring just how society really is can lead to disaster — we’ve seen that
before, let’s not see it again.

END

Labour Theory of Value: (2009,2011,2015) (Very Important)

The labor theory of value is a major pillar of traditional Marxian economics, which is evident in
Marx’s masterpiece, Capital (1867). The theory’s basic claim is simple: the value of a
commodity can be objectively measured by the average number of labor hours required to
produce that commodity.

If a pair of shoes usually takes twice as long to produce as a pair of pants, for example, then
shoes are twice as valuable as pants. In the long run, the competitive price of shoes will be
twice the price of pants, regardless of the value of the physical inputs.

Classical Economists and Labour Theory:

Although the labour theory of value is demonstrably false, it prevailed among classical
economists through the mid-nineteenth century. Adam Smith, for instance, flirted with a
labour theory of value in his classic defense of capitalism, The Wealth of Nations (1776),
and David Ricardo later systematized it in his Principles of Political Economy (1817), a
text studied by generations of free-market economists.
So, the labor theory of value was not unique to Marxism. Marx did attempt, however, to turn
the theory against the champions of capitalism, pushing the theory in a direction that most
classical economists hesitated to follow. Marx argued that the theory could explain the value of
all commodities, including the commodity that workers sell to capitalists for a wage. Marx called
this commodity “labor power.”

Labour Power:

Labor power is the worker’s capacity to produce goods and services. Marx, using principles of
classical economics, explained that the value of labor power must depend on the number of
labor hours it takes society, on average, to feed, clothe, and shelter a worker so that he or she
has the capacity to work. In other words, the long-run wage workers receive will depend on the
number of labor hours it takes to produce a person who is fit for work. Suppose five hours of
labor are needed to feed, clothe, and protect a worker each day so that the worker is fit for work
the following morning. If one labor hour equaled one dollar, the correct wage would be five
dollars per day.

Marx then asked an apparently devastating question: if all goods and services in a capitalist
society tend to be sold at prices (and wages) that reflect their true value (measured by labor
hours), how can it be that capitalists enjoy PROFITS—even if only in the short run? How do
capitalists manage to squeeze out a residual between total revenue and total costs?

Exploitation of Proletariats:

Capitalists, Marx answered, must enjoy a privileged and powerful position as owners of the
means of production and are therefore able to ruthlessly exploit workers. Although the capitalist
pays workers the correct wage, somehow—Marx was terribly vague here—the capitalist makes
workers work more hours than are needed to create the worker’s labor power. If the capitalist
pays each worker five dollars per day, he can require workers to work, say, twelve hours per
day—a not uncommon workday during Marx’s time. Hence, if one labor hour equals one dollar,
workers produce twelve dollars’ worth of products for the capitalist but are paid only five. The
bottom line: capitalists extract “surplus value” from the workers and enjoy monetary profits.

Marx was drawn to the labor theory because he believed human labor was the only common
characteristic shared by all goods and services exchanged on the market. For Marx,
however, it was not enough for two goods to have an equivalent amount of labor; instead, the
two goods must have the same amount of "socially necessary" labor.

Critique against Free-Market:

Marx used the labor theory to launch a critique against free-market classical economists in the
tradition of Adam Smith. If, he asked, all goods and services in a capitalist system are sold at
prices that reflect their true value, and all values are measured in labor hours, how can
capitalists ever enjoy profits unless they pay their workers less than the real value of their labor?
It was on this basis that Marx developed the exploitation theory of capitalism
Although Marx tried to use the labor theory of value against capitalism by stretching it to its
limits, he unintentionally demonstrated the weakness of the theory’s logic and underlying
assumptions. Marx was correct when he claimed that classical economists failed to adequately
explain capitalist profits. But Marx failed as well. By the late nineteenth century, the economics
profession rejected the labor theory of value. Mainstream economists now believe that
capitalists do not earn profits by exploiting workers (see PROFITS). Instead, they believe,
entrepreneurial capitalists earn profits by forgoing current consumption, by taking risks, and by
organizing production.

Problems with the Labor Theory of Value:

The labor theory of value leads to obvious problems theoretically and in practice. Firstly, it is
clearly possible to expend a large quantity of labor time on producing a good that ends up
having little or no value, such as mud pies or unfunny jokes. Marx's concept of socially
necessary labor time was an attempt to get around this problem. Secondly, goods that
require the same amount of labor time to produce often have widely different market prices
on a regular basis. According to the labor theory of value, this should be impossible, yet it is
an easily observed, daily norm. Thirdly, the observed relative prices of goods fluctuate greatly
over time, regardless of the amount of labor time expended upon their production, and often
do not maintain or tend toward any stable ratio (or natural price).

The Subjectivist Theory Takes Over:

The labor theory's problems were finally resolved by the subjective theory of value. In the
labor theory of value, labor time expended causes economic goods to be valuable; in the
subjective theory of value, the use value people get from goods causes them to be willing to
expend labor to produce them.

END

Division of Labour: (Memorize) (2002)

The division of labour is the separation of tasks in any economic system so that participants
may specialize (specialization). Marx argued that increasing the specialization may also lead
to workers with poorer overall skills and a lack of enthusiasm for their work. He described the
process as alienation: workers become more and more specialized and work becomes
repetitive, eventually leading to complete alienation from the process of production. The worker
then becomes "depressed spiritually and physically to the condition of a machine"

Social Division of Labour and Division of Labour in Manufacture:

Marx pin-points two types of division of labour, namely, social division of labour and division of
labour in manufacture.

Social division of labour:

It is a complex system of dividing all the useful forms of labour in a society. For instance, some
individuals produce food, some produce handicrafts, weapons and so on. Social division of
labour promotes the process of exchange of goods between groups, e.g., the earthenware
pots produced by a potter may be exchanged for a farmer’s rice.
Division of labour in industry or manufacture:
This is a process, which is prevalent in industrial societies where capitalism and the factory
system exist. In this process, manufacture of a commodity is broken into a number of
processes. Each worker is limited to performing or engaging in a small process like work in an
assembly line. This is usually boring, monotonous and repetitive work. The purpose of this
division of labour is simple; it is to increase productivity. The greater the productivity the greater
the surplus value generated. It is generation of surplus value that motivates capitalists to
organise manufacture in a manner that maximises output and minimises costs.

Implications of Division of Labour in Manufacture:

Following are the implications of division of labour:

Profits accrue to the capitalist:

According to Marx, division of labour and the existence of private property together consolidate
the power of the capitalist. Since the capitalist owns the means of production, the production
process is designed and operated in such a way that the capitalist benefits the most from it
and not those who actually produce.

Workers lose control over what they produce:

According to Marx with division of labour in manufacture workers tend to lose their status as
the real creators of goods. Rather, they become mere links in a production chain designed and
operated by the capitalists

Dehumanisation of the Working Class:

The capitalist system characterised by division of labour is one where workers stop being
independent producers of goods. They become suppliers of labour-power, which is needed for
production. The worker’s individual personality needs and desires mean nothing to the
capitalist. It is only the worker’s labour-power which is sold to the capitalist in exchange for
wages that concerns the capitalist. The working class is thus stripped of its humanness and
labour-power becomes a mere commodity purchased by the capitalist, in Marx’s view.

Alienation: (Done Previously)

Marx’s Remedy – Revolution (Revolution: Done Previously)

END
How Marx Matters Today: (Memorize) (2020)
There is sometimes a tendency to discount Marx because some of the predictions he made
about the next stage of capitalism (and communism) did not come to pass. True enough,
Marx was a brilliant social theorist, but he wasn’t a prophet. But many of Marx’s most
fundamental insights into the nature of modern capitalism still help us understand the
capitalist system we live in today. His argument that capitalism is prone to regular crises rings
true in relation to events like the recent global economic meltdown. While we almost certainly
will continue to live in a capitalist as opposed to a communist economic world, it is an
economic system that increasingly relies on the intervention and support of political
institutions like the state (bailouts, anyone?) to keep it afloat, much as Marx predicted.

Exploitation of Working Class:

For Marxists, socialism – as a system that embraces elements of emancipation such as
modernisation– not only promotes the development of the productive forces but also promises
the birth of a higher level of civilisation. Capitalism has gone through a lot of changes in 200
years. But its economic system is still based on the exploitation of wage labour, which produces
surplus value; and surplus value is mainly unpaid wages.

New Bourgeoisie Control Cultural Capital:

Private ownership of productive assets gives rise to economic exploitation (profit). In addition,
armies of executives and professionals grow and have significant powers of control. This has
resulted in the making of a ‘new bourgeoisie’ that has cultural capital. Members of this new
bourgeoisie control the creation of knowledge and dominate the fields of science and
technology, education and the media. Ownership of productive assets drives the activity of
these organisations. Companies such as Google, Disney and Netflix operate for profit and their
economic developments are largely determined by their market position and quest for profits.

Domination of Identity Politics in Sociology:

Modern sociology is concerned with race, ethnicity and gender relations as a form of
domination and subordination. However, such relationships, as important components of
identity politics, cannot be equated with economic exploitation which remains the driving force
for capitalism. Identity politics calls for justice and equal rights before the law, not
transformation of capitalism. It promotes individual liberation and not eradication of economic
exploitation. Equal access to unequal structures of ownership may strengthen and not weaken
the composition of the class system based on property.

Mobility of Capital across countries:

As international companies seek to reduce labour costs, the greater mobility of capital and
cheapening of transport enables manufacturing units to be located in areas of low-paid labour.
Electronic communication under neo-liberalism promotes the mobility of capital with almost no
restrictions and, in doing so, changes the combination of the factors of production in low income
 countries. Hence, the focus on class conflict can no longer be contained within the boundaries
of a nation state.
Karl Marx’s ideas are still alive and relevant in today’s world, and can answer the complex and
difficult questions faced by capitalism in the 21st century. His ideas and methods of analysis
can still be used to interpret the world in order to change it for the better.

END

MCQs
1. The concept of the iron cage was popularized Max Weber.
2. According to Marx, the bourgeoisie own the means of production in a society.
3. Which of the following best depicts Marx’s concept of alienation from the process of one’s
labour?
• A supermarket cashier always scans store coupons before company coupons because she
was taught to do it that way.

4. Karl Marx believed that the history of society was one of class struggle?