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.
Marx views history as being determined by economics, which for him is the source of class differences. History is described in The Communist Manifesto as a series of conflicts between oppressing classes and oppressed classes. According to this view of history, massive changes occur in a society when new technological capabilities allow a portion of the oppressed class to destroy the power of the oppressing class. Marx briefly traces the development of this through different periods, mentioning some of the various oppressed and oppressing classes, but points out that in earlier societies there were many gradations of social classes. He also states that this class conflict sometimes leads to "...the common ruin of the contending classes" (Marx 9).
It exposes that the cultural, political and economic struggles among social forces and state clarify the emergence of international regimes and global civil society. The essentials of thus neo- Gramscian include that the hegemony bases upon the consensus and consent rather than the coercion. A wider theory of state emerges within this neo- Gramscian theory. The concept of hegemony relative to this theory’s perspective is the comprehensive concept of control. Thus concluding it, the neo-Gramscian concept of hegemony is the appearance of largely based authority apparent in the approval of ideas and supported by institutions and material resources.
However, Michel Foucalt was able to change critics’ viewpoint to see that cultural processes cause material outcomes. The authors explain that, “Foucault removed the critical aspect of determinism from his theories by talking about ‘what was possible’ in various social contexts between groups and people with varying levels of power/knowledge.” (CITE) The problem they see with this new cultural turn is that it leads from positivistic universalism into institutional and historical specification of theoretical domains and then into somewhere that theory serves only to regulate interpretation of certain events. The authors believe that the middle-range theory provides an appropriate middle point in this slippery slope. They also believe sociologists need to avoid cultural theorizing into particularism. Three different approaches are provided for new cultural sociology.
When studying oppressed and minority groups, historical analysis is valuable in aiding the development of alternative models of social change. Odell (2001: 161-163) substantiates this by stating that historical analysis is characteristically used to develop and critique diverse ranges of political and social theories. More specifically, historical analysis can be utilised to aid in illustrating a theoretical idea, to test a theory, or to generate a new theory. Historical analysis reveals more than theory can on its own, and can provide context and reasoning to... ... middle of paper ... ...reat to the credibility of historical analysis, and if are not overcome, lead to ineffectual and unreliable representations of history (Jupp 2006: 135-137). This would be detrimental when attempting to understand development and social change.
The Manifesto of the Communist Party is a call to political action by the working class. German philosopher Karl Marx (May 5, 1818-March 14,1883) advocates a revolution of the working class, which involves a turn to communism in order for the working class to gain their financial and political freedom from the hands of the bourgeoisie. Karl Marx, in the Manifesto of the Communist Party, criticizes capitalism and places a deeper focus on class struggle. He offers suggestions that the working class should make in rebellion against the bourgeoisie class. In order for the proletariats to gain their financial freedom, Karl Marx asserts that the workers of the world must adopt a society of communism.
Weber describes the routinization of capitalism by stating, “The Puritan wanted to work in a calling; we are forced to do so” (1905: 123). When an economic system becomes routinized, the worker has difficulty seeing an alternative to his present situation. As a result, routinization impedes class consciousness and the desire for revolution because it causes capitalism and the inequality it entails to appear normative. Similar to Weber, Simmel also explores social forces that Marx’s economically centered theories fail to consider. Marx focuses solely on macro-level structures and disregards the role that individual agency might play in social and economic life.
People sell their laboring-power to a buyer, not to satisfy the per... ... middle of paper ... ... his ideals and theories were influenced by the popular philosophical circles present throughout Europe. Saint Simon was a noble Frenchman whose spin on socialism featured a government ran by scientists. Proudon was another radical thinker that influenced Marx. Proudon’s book, “What is Property” centers around privatization of property and comes to the conclusion that the factors of production is theft. When Marx moved to France, he was introduced to many different socialist viewpoints which inspired his argument known as historical materialism.
Karl Marx wrote in his 1859 ‘Towards a Critique of Political Economy’ that “it is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence but their social existence that determines their consciousness”. By stating this, Marx sheds light into the workings of ‘The Great Gatsby’ thus showing that the social circumstances in which the characters find themselves define them, and that these circumstances consist of core Marxist principles a Capitalistic society. These principles being ‘commodity fetishism’ and ‘reification’ are useful aids in interpreting and understanding the core themes that run throughout the text. Marx did not see the class system to be the regular upper, middle and lower generalization that it is so often seen in the Western world today. Conversely, Marxist theory states that “the way we think….largely conditioned by the way the economy is organized” and that the economy is the “base of society” .
Marxist theory is based on the idea that the homogeneity of one’s everyday life is fractured by class struggle. This discontinuity is caused by the chasm between those who possess wealth and those who do not possess wealth, which occurs, by and large, in a capitalist society. On the surface, an examination of Franz Kafka’s The Metamorphosis through this Marxist lens reveals that the novel is a denunciation of the capitalist society in which protagonist Gregor Samsa lives in because of this class struggle. However, one other primary aspect of Marxism’s methodology must be taken into consideration when critiquing Kafka’s novel: dialectics. Marx’s dialectic is a method of discussion, analysis, and argumentation that attempts to understand reality.