Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Marx and weber compare and contrast
Marx and weber compare and contrast
Marx and weber compare and contrast
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Marx and weber compare and contrast
Weber and Marx have both written accounts on the rise of capitalism and the bourgeoisie class in an attempt to understand the resulting inequalities that still exist today. Weber has criticised the work of Marx, citing how limited it is use a purely economic framework, labelled as historical materialism, instead of looking at all factors within society (Weber 2001: 20). Weber provides evidence and conclusions that mirror Marx, suggesting that his criticism is faulty. First, both writers recognise an inequality between the poor and rich resulting from the rise of capitalism and the bourgeoisie (Marx and Engels 2008: 34-36; Weber 2001: 28-30). Second, they both suggest broader systems of delusion meant to normalise the exploitation of the worker, and validate the gains of the bourgeoisie (Marx and Engels 2008: 38-40; Weber 2001: 24-27). Third, both authors refer to the development of systems that divides workers and suppresses 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 shows 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.
Marx’s expla...
... middle of paper ...
...he apparent overlap between the two authors. This lost potential is evident in the superior argument Weber includes that Marx neglects, but could have easily included. Weber takes these three claims and provides evidence of the adoption, transformation, and removal of morals and ethos through the guise of religion, to achieve deeper political goals. These authors criticise capitalism in very similar ways, yet Weber actively works against Marx. Like the naturalised divides set between workers, how may labels and rhetoric of different disciplines affect the ability of academics to question larger, naturalised institutions?
Works Cited
Marx, Karl & Friedrich Engels. 2008 (1848). The Communist Manifesto. Introduction by David Harvey. London: Pluto Press. ISBN: 978-0745328461
Weber, Max. . The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. London: Routledge.
1b. Provide an analysis of pages 298-303 (starting at […] on 298 and ending at “employer’s organized life. […]”) of Weber’s “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism” in the Calhoun reader. Identity with specific reference to the text what is the key argument that Weber develops in this section.
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.
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”
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 for the 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 result of a new mode of production. According to Marx, history would consist of epochs of modes of production.
Marx, Karl and Friedrich Engels. "The Communist Manifesto." The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. Ed. Vincent B. Leitch. New York: Norton, 2001. 769-773.
In Marx’s opinion, the cause of poverty has always been due to the struggle between social classes, with one class keeping its power by suppressing the other classes. He claims the opposing forces of the Industrial Age are the bourgeois and the proletarians. Marx describes the bourgeois as a middle class drunk on power. The bourgeois are the controllers of industrialization, the owners of the factories that abuse their workers and strip all human dignity away from them for pennies. Industry, Marx says, has made the proletariat working class only a tool for increasing the wealth of the bourgeoisie. Because the aim of the bourgeoisie is to increase their trade and wealth, it is necessary to exploit the worker to maximize profit. This, according to Marx, is why the labor of the proletariat continued to steadily increase while the wages of the proletariat continued to steadily decrease.
During a time of growing industry and a technological boom, Weber argued that Capitalist motivation stemmed from the Calvinist’s belief in the “calling”. The calling is defined as “an obligation which the individual is supposed to feel and does feel towards the content of his professional activity” (Weber 2003 54). Weber states that with the Protestant Reformation and the individualization of faith pushed forward the spirit of Capitalism. As the interpretation of the Bible became easier to access, it also became more open to interpretation for the individual reading. The calling interpretation of one’s own calling, thus becomes subjective and malleable for the individual to experience validation in their
In his Manifesto of the Communist Party Karl Marx created a radical theory revolving not around the man made institution of government itself, but around the ever present guiding vice of man that is materialism and the economic classes that stemmed from it. By unfolding the relat...
Marx, Karl, Friedrich Engels, and Robert C. Tucker. The Marx-Engels reader . 2d ed. New York: Norton, 1978. Print.
Max Weber’s main contention in this work is that what he calls the “Protestant Ethic” played a vital role in fostering the development of industrial capitalism in Europe and the United States. The Protestant Ethic was the idea found in some sects of Protestantism that one had a duty to God to succeed in their life’s work, but were bound to a lifestyle of asceticism that prevented them from spending the wealth they earned on themselves. 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.
Bender, Frederic L. Karl Marx: The Communist Manifesto. New York: W.W. Norton & Company. ed. 1988.
Marx, Karl, Friedrich Engels, and Robert C. Tucker. The Marx-Engels reader. 2nd ed. New York: Norton, 1978. Print.
Max Weber (1864-1920), a prominent theorist of social science, had already witnessed both democracy and capitalism unfold and function in both Europe and the United States when he began writing at the turn of the 20th century. He followed in the footsteps of other social scientists and scholars such as Karl Marx, Friedrich Nietzsche, Charles Darwin, and Emile Durkheim who had all produced literary works in the 19th century. In 1905, while writing The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism and pondering the effects of a “modern market economy” on the future of democracy, Weber asked, “How are freedom and democracy in the long run at all possible under the domination of highly developed capitalism?” (Gerth and Mills 1958, 71). Weber was
Karl Marx’s critique of political economy provides a scientific understanding of the history of capitalism. Through Marx’s critique, the history of society is revealed. Capitalism is not just an economic system in Marx’s analysis. It’s a “specific social form of labor” that is strongly related to society. Marx’s critique of capitalism provides us a deep understanding of the system to predict its pattern and protect ourselves from its negative sides.
As he mentioned in his book The Protestant Ethic and the spirit of capitalism, capitalism isn’t about being rich. Weber said that there was a connection between religions. He mentioned that Protestants are more likely to be successful businessmen than Catholics. The reason for this was because he believed that a protestant earns money to accumulate savings, not for luxuries. By implying this, he claimed that modern capitalism arose in Western Europe and it is specific to protestant values and faith. Marx Weber goes on and explains capitalism, he explains the work ethic in terms of religious sentiment claiming that financial pursuits was rooted from work ethic and in turn become the new religion. "Man is dominated by the making of money, by acquisition as the ultimate purpose of his life." While Karl Marx views capitalism as a way to repress from having the elite control the wealth,...