Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The ideology of Karl Marx
The writings of Karl Marx
The writings of Karl Marx
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
During the nineteenth century, Karl Marx and Max Weber were two of the most influential sociologists. Both of them tried to explain social change taking place in a society at that time. On the one hand, their views are very different, but on the other hand, they had many similarities. Weber had argued that Marx was too narrow in his views. He felt that Marx was only concerned with the economic issues and believed that that issue is a central force that changed the society. Weber, on the other hand, tried to look at the macro-sociological phenomenon in his explanation. Weber felt that there is just more than one explanation about causes of change. Marx’s perspective was not based on the conflict of ideas, but rather on the conflict of classes. This conflict is the results of a new mode of production. According to Marx, history would consist of epochs of modes of production. He states that these modes of production are: primitive communism, slave society, feudalism, capitalism, and then socialism and communism. The changes accompany the transition from one epoch to another. In the late nineteenth century labor has become a commodity to the merchants, and the formation of a new mode of production has risen which gave rise to a capitalist society. There is a new class distinction between the laborer and those who owned the means of production. Max Weber was opposed to Marx and believed that his theory was an oversimplification of history. He thought Marx’s view of history was too focused on economics and was not considering the role of ideas and values as causes. Weber felt that scientific, historical, and philosophical causation was so connected with economic development that they can not be considered separately as causes of change in the society. He used the relationship between society and the individual to explain the causes of change in terms of social development. Weber also thought there was a link between capitalism and the Protestant work ethic. Specifically he looked at Calvinism. Calvinism was a simple way of life in which you were to do good for others. The way into heaven was to do the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Work was done not for one’s own personal gain, but for the sake of god. Weber found that in areas where Calvinism was the highest is where capitalism rose first, and no other religion resulted in the rise of capitalism.
This theory views history of human beings as a succession of modes of production to meet human material needs. This mode of production determines the social relation that would exist among a society. According to the theory, when a change in mode of production takes place, there will be a conflict “between the forces of production and the social relations of production” ("Marx And Historical Materialism")
Karl Marx (1818 - 1883) and Max Weber (1864 - 1920) both recognised that economic categories played a large part in social class structure. Nineteenth Century history plays an important part in understanding how class influenced identities. The Industrial revolution was changing the structure of the communities, the rich or landowners having a far better standard of living with better education, health care, property ownership and power than the poor. The working class would have a daily struggle to survive. The change in Trade Unions meant that the working class had a voice, helping to push their needs forward, looking for better standards of living and working conditions. Marx's concept of class was based around the production of goods. The emerging owners of these goods, or capital, were known as the ruling class. Marxism would define only two classes, the ruling class and the working class. The influence on identity of these two class structures would be very relevant in those days. The working class would earn a wage from the production of the goods but the ruling class would sell these for a profit and exploit the workers. The two classes were on two different levels of wealth, property ownership and social standing and they would struggle to mix, they were dependent on each other but the rewards would be unevenly matched.
Third, both authors refer to the development of systems that divide workers and suppress their ability to deviate from or break capitalism (Marx and Engels 2008: 44; Weber 2001: 19; 115). Therefore, Weber’s criticism of Marx is only partially correct. Marx actually discusses social, political, and even moral elements despite both authors believing that The Communist Manifesto is solely about economics; the overlap between their conclusions demonstrates such variety. Weber’s work is superior though because he integrates examples of religion and morals to further support these points: the oppressive systems of capitalism and the persistent class antagonisms. Disproving even Marx’s own identity as an economist, Weber’s argument is marginally superior because it uses morality to elaborate on Marx’s seemingly-economic conclusions regarding the rise of bourgeois capitalism.
...lth and being successful. They devoted their lives to being wealthy and being stingy. This was considered “good works”, but they also believed in hard work and earning their wealth fairly. Weber called this life style the Protestant ethic. These ideas later blossomed into capitalism because Calvinists strived to be rich and did what they had to do to become that way and keep it. Later down the road, capitalism pulled away from its roots where working hard and being honest was a must. Today, it’s just a big strive for money and power.
While growing up in Germany Max Weber witnessed the expansion of cities, the aristocracy being replaced by managerial elite, companies rapidly rising, and the industrial revolution. These changes in Germany, as well as the rest of the western world, pushed Weber to analyze the phenomenon, specifically to understand what makes capitalism in the west different and how capitalism was established. In The Protestant Ethic and The Spirit of Capitalism, Weber explains that capitalism is all about profit and what creates the variance between capitalism in the west and the rest of the world is rationalization, “the process in which social institutions and social interaction become increasingly governed by systematic, methodical procedures and rules”
On one particular edition of Weber's The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, the phrase Weber “opposes the Marxian concept of historical materialism” can be seen on the back cover. It is this phrase that causes us to question the two theorists' stances on the creation of sociopolitical institutions. The Protestant Ethic challenges Marx's idea of historical materialism, t...
1). Weber and Marx views differ when it comes to their interpretations about the origins and dynamics of capitalism, Weber’s view focuses on the Protestant reformation and the spirit of capitalism in the west and how “the widespread influence of Protestantism after the reformation helped explain why full blown rational capitalism developed where and when it did” (Mcintosh pg. 115). Although he doesn’t believe that Protestantism caused for the creation of capitalism he does believe that Calvinism a branch of Protestantism plays a roll due to the effects it shaped upon these people and their protestant ethics. Mcintosh helps to explain that “in such a time the religious forces which express themselves through such channels are the decisive influences in the formation of national character” (Mcintosh pg. 122). In other words due to the asceticism and the spirit of capitalism amongst these religious followers they abstained from various worldly pleasures to obtain their spiritual “calling”. In decreasing pleasures and increasing work, production and profits, they were hopeful that they were increasing their chances of going to heaven due to their belief about predestination which states “in theology, the doctrine that all events have been willed by God. John Calvin interpreted biblical predestination to mean that God willed eternal damnation for some people and salvation for others” (www.wikipedia.com). Thus they followed the doctrine precisely, which they believed could possibly decrease their chances of being the individuals who were damned to hell. Although Wesley argued “I fear that wherever riches have increased, the essence of religion has decreased in the same proportion. So although the form of religion remains, the spirit i...
Marx focused on economy, not history. In contrast Waber interested ideas and history about how capitalism emerged. Marx ruling class has the prestige respect and nobility. Weber democratic, people elect their representatives, Ideas and innovations. Weber emphasized that social class is shaped by demand and supply. Waber; the protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism, this is where pure form of capitalism emerged because of hard work and calling. In contrast Marx; believed that religion is the drug of people. It means that it keeps them with self-satisfaction. He also, argued that religion withhold peoples or social development and mislead the poor people. Marx: favor Waber and argued that Capitalism was progressive at the first time. It replaced the other systems dominated by kings, and churches. It pushes back illiteracy, and lack of free market. It emerged to make money all around the world and generate wealthier. Also, it enables persons to consume goods. After all, it transformed system of exploitation and creates social classes and inequality. That is why he proposed to replace capitalist with a system dominated by the working class. On the other hand, Waber think that there is no way to change
In the Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx, with the help of Friedrich Engel, advocated for the violent overthrow of capitalism and the creation of a socialist society. According to Marx, “The history of hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles” (184). Notably, Marx and Engel were the main proponents of communism. Marx’s main argument was that the society is the product of class conflict that results in different social classes with opposing economic interests. Importantly, Marx believed that the society comprised the oppressor and the oppressed, and the two are in constant conflict with each other. The ensuing conflict results in the revolutionary reorganization of the society, or the ruin of the opposing classes. Therefore, Marx, like Kant, saw the institutions of a given society as influential in determining its future. However, Marx argued that traditional institutions were unsuitable for a free and just society that respected human dignity. For example, he saw the modern bourgeoisie society as a product of the “ruins of feudal society,” meaning that the modern society is yet to resolve class antagonisms (184). Indeed, he sees the modern-day social classes as the products of the serfs and burgesses of the middle ages. In this regard, he claimed that the modern social structures are the products of a sequence of revolutions in the systems of production, as well as exchange. However, modern social structures are yet to enhance equity in the society. Therefore, Marx advocated for a revolution that would change the existing social structures and prepare the society to adopt communism. Unlike Kant’s idea of freedom of speech, which is a mind influencing process, Marx seemed more violent by the stating that “let the ruling classes tremble at a communistic revolution”
Weber believes in authority and the distribution of power. A rise in capitalism development, not for the pursuit of wealth but profit through peaceful exchange. In general Weber is less emotional
Max Weber’s outlines his views on religion and capitalism in his book, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Weber held the important theory that an individual’s views are significant in promoting social change, not material things as believed by former theorists. In his work, Weber compares two waves of “the calling” as preached by different Protestant leaders and describes the teaching and spread of ascetic beliefs in followers. This paper considers the context of the calling, explores the outward signs of grace which helped develop capitalism and, lastly, how capitalism, through rationalization, transformed Calvinist ideals for its advancement.
The wealth that was accumulated through this lifestyle was reinvested into the work process in order to create more wealth. This continual reinvestment of wealth provided the necessary capital and conditions that allowed for the development of modern capitalism. Weber starts out his essay with a few questions that he proposes to try and answer. He notes that European business leaders are overwhelmingly Protestant instead of Catholic. He also notices that the most developed areas of Europe in his time were those that had embraced Protestantism (Weber, 4).
The German Sociologist Max Weber was considered one of the world’s greatest sociologist. In his work “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism”, Max Weber declared that religion was one of the agents of social change. In his piece he discusses some of the norms and ideas pertaining to Protestantism, and Calvinism that later develop the meaning of “the spirit of capitalism”. In “The Protestant Ethic …”, Weber focused on how the “calling” combined with ascetic restrictions led to the development of capitalism.
Once capitalism came about, it was like a machine that you were being pulled into without an alternative option. Currently, whether we agree or disagree, for example if you want to survive you need to have a job and you need to make money. Weber believed that social actions were becoming based on efficiency instead of the old types of social actions, which were based on lineage or kinship. Behavior had become dominated by goal-oriented rationality and less by tradition and values. According to Web...
In short, Marx stated that class represent group of people. Based on collective effervescence, people with shared thoughts and ideas will spontaneously group together and develop collective consciousness, that they are all somewhat related to each other. On the other hand, Weber suggested that class is not a group, it is just people with same characteristics gather together, they don't necessarily have moral solidarity, the connection with each