Marx and Stratification

An overview of Karl Marx's classic theory of stratification, beginning with Marx's conceptualization of class and followed by a detailed exploration of conditions that Marx outlined for societal change is provided. According to Marx, all societies throughout human history ultimately divide into two conflicting classes: the dominant ruling class who own the means of society's productive resources and workers who do not. In a capitalist society, it is the polarization between two classes—the dominant capitalist or bourgeoisie class and the subordinate working class or proletariat—that Marx theorizes would inevitably grow until a dynamic class struggle forces revolutionary societal change. For Marx, such inequality is not part of the human condition, but in a capitalist society it is a fundamental characteristic. The second section of this paper presents features of the class system in the United States, and illustrates the relevance of Marxian theory. Indeed, Marx's theory has made significant contributions to the understanding of the origins and development of class and stratification, and thus his nineteenth and early twentieth century writings remain relevant to contemporary sociology.

Keywords Blue-Collar Workers; Bourgeoisie; Capitalism; Class; Class Consciousness; Karl Marx; Lower-Middle Class; Lower Class; Means of Production; Middle Class; Proletariat; Ruling Class; Socialism; Social Stratification; Socioeconomic Status; Upper Class; Working Class

Marx & Stratification

Overview

German philosopher Karl Marx (1818–1883) is one of the most prominent political and economic thinkers of the nineteenth century. In 1848 Marx wrote The Communist Manifesto with his friend and collaborator German philosopher Friedrich Engels. In it Marx and Engels argue the inevitability of revolutionary conflict between classes. Ultimately, the book Das Kapital, which became the foundation for socialism, is widely considered to be Marx's masterpiece. It is these writings and others published by Marx and Engels that form the foundation of thought and belief known as Marxism.

Many of the basic concepts that Marx presented in his nineteenth and early twentieth century writings remain relevant to contemporary sociology and continue to be applied and debated by social scientists today. Marx's classic theory on social stratification published in The Communist Manifesto opens the first section of this paper. The second section focuses on interpretations and applications of Marx's theory as it relates to contemporary patterns of stratification in American society.

Marxian Theory of Stratification

Marx's writings of the nineteenth century are perhaps the most influential for attempting to understand the origins and development of stratification in capitalist societies. According to Marx, the division between two classes—the dominant capitalist or bourgeoisie class and the subordinate working class or proletariat—would inevitably grow until a dynamic class struggle forced revolutionary societal change.

Marx's Conceptualization of Class

The concept of class has long been the focus of sociological debate and theory, and Marx's analysis of class is no exception. While there exists a lack of consensus on the core concepts of class analysis within the Marxist tradition, Marx's focus on class has sparked endless debate and research for its complex analysis of the origins and development of class structure.

Class, in its most general of definitions, refers to the grouping of individuals with similar incomes and occupations. Marx's conceptualization of class suggests a definition beyond that of relation to purely economic resources: it elaborates these relations with regard to the individual's relationship to the society's means of production. According to Marx, the means of production refers to the productive resources in society; in other words, things that are necessary to supply the society's economic needs, for example, the types of technology used to produce basic necessities within the economic system. An individual's relationship to the economic system depends on how he relates to the sources of power in that system. In feudal times, for example, the landlord had power over the society's productive resources and the peasants. In modern times power resides in the hands of capitalists who own the means of production. The worker, possessing no capital, only labor power, must sell it to the owner of capital (Freedman, 2005). Thus, for Marx, those people who hold the same position with regard to the productive process share a class—owners and workers, haves and have-nots.

Essentially, then, societies are composed of two classes: the owners of the means of production and the workers. Indeed, within all societies, according to Marx, regardless of their different productive processes there exist these two opposing classes (e.g., masters and slaves in slave societies). In Marxian theory, these two classes in capitalist societies are the bourgeoisie or capitalist class, and the proletariat or working class.

The Bourgeoisie & the Proletariat

Bourgeoisie is a Marxian term that refers to the class of owners of the means of production who are the employers of the workers. The proletariat refers to the class of workers who do not own the means of production and are therefore forced to selling their labor in order to make a living. Inequality, then, arises out of this division of society into capitalists and proletariat, owners and workers. This is the essence of Marxian theory of stratification and inequality as presented in The Communist Manifesto . According to Marx's analysis of class, the specific roles that people play in the economic system are not of their free will, but are forced upon them by necessity. The unequal distribution of society's productive resources creates a system of stratification. Authors often use an analogy from the field of geology to illustrate the sociological meaning of stratification—that is, different layers of the earth's subsoil or strata have different properties. In sociology, of course, it is human groups that are arranged in different layers or vertical order. From a sociological perspective, people situated at these various rankings in the vertical order receive unequal shares of the society's wealth and possess differing degrees of power over others.

Marx views capitalism as a political tool for this ranking of human groups for the purpose of distributing wealth and power within the economic system rather than as a system for producing goods and services to fill human needs. It is the social institutions in societies such as the economy, government, and education that operate to assure the position of various human groups (Freedman, 2005). In Marxian theory, the capitalist class (the bourgeoisie) is able to maintain its power within the system of stratification because it possesses three key assets:

• The means of production,

• Control of the state, and

• Control of ideas and values (Marger, 2008).

The proletariat or working class, without power and control over the means of production, are forced to sell their labor to the capitalists, and thus, must accept what the capitalists will pay in wages. According to Marx, workers are not paid the full value of their labor despite their role in producing wealth for the economic system; they get only what the capitalist is willing to pay and the surplus is taken by the capitalist for profit. It is unlikely then in these exploitative conditions that a worker will ever be able to save enough to ultimately possess their own productive property and become capitalists themselves (Marger, 2008).

…the proletariat, the modern working class, developed-a class of labourers, who live only so long as they find work, and who find work only so long as their labour increases capital. These labourers, who must sell themselves piecemeal, are a commodity, like every other article of commerce, and are consequently exposed to all the vicissitudes of competition, to all the fluctuations of the market (Marx & Engels as cited in Shapiro, 2005, p. 40).

Capitalist Control of Government & Social Order

The capitalist class is also able to maintain its power within the system of stratification because it controls the state or government: "The executive of the modern State is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie" (Marx & Engels as cited in Tucker, 1972, p. 337). The class structure thus gives rise to a governmental institution that functions for the sole purpose of protecting the property and privileges of the capitalists.

Capitalists are further able to maintain their power within the system of stratification through possession of society's ideas and values which serve to assure workers' compliance with the social order of capitalist society. Marx stated in The Communist Manifesto that "the ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas: i.e., the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time the ruling intellectual force" (Marx & Engels as cited in Tucker, 1972, p. 136). Workers, lacking class consciousness or self-awareness of their own class interests hence regard the ideas and values of the dominant capitalist class as "natural" and comply.

Class Conflict and Societal Transformation

"The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles," states Marx in the opening line of The Communist Manifesto. To Marx, inequality among classes is a result over the struggle for the control of society's productive resources (i.e., the means of production). One segment of the population owns these resources, while the other does not and can therefore offer only human labor in exchange for material needs. Marx argued that class conflict is inevitable in societies as long as one dominant class has control over the means of production, the state, and ideas and values. Marx considers class struggle as the major generator of transformation within societies. Indeed, Marx was optimistic about the potential end to inequality, as he viewed classes as forces that hold the capacity for societal change.

Marx believed that any changes in a society's class structure could be realized only by a revolutionary movement that would strip capitalists of control of the means of production. To arrive at this position, the workers or proletariat class first must become aware of their common sociopolitical and economic interests and commit to a struggle with the capitalist class to protect and enhance their interests. Marx states, "the proletariat not only increases in number; it becomes concentrated in greater masses, its strength grows, and it feels that strength more" (Marx & Engels, as cited in Shapiro, 2005, p. 41). Thus, Marx felt the workers' transformation into a political group would lead to a revolutionary confrontation with the bourgeoisie (Marger, 2008). In other words, the workers achieve class consciousness and possess a readiness to liberate themselves into "the class that holds the future in its hands." Eventually, according to Marx, class conflict gives rise to social transformation, resulting in a new type of production and thus, creating a new ruling class. This conflict leads to the proletarian movement characterized by the demise of capitalism and the emergence of socialism in which the workers control the means of production, and ultimately, a communist and classless society emerges.

Though it is largely speculative based on interpretations of Marx's writings, the nature of society following the revolutionary movement that Marx envisioned is characterized by a transitional period of socialism in which the workers control the means of production, resulting in a shift of power to a proletarian state. Only with the complete elimination of classes would communism emerge. With communism in place, there is then no need for the state because there are no class interests to protect (Marger, 2008). Therefore, it is the class conflict between capitalists and proletariat that provides the momentum toward the demise of capitalism and emergence of socialism, followed by communism. As Marger (2008) points out, however, Marx was uncertain about the nature of the revolutionary struggle between the classes; though he did conceive that worker exploitation and rapid industrialization would eventually drive the revolutionary movement. In the end, "Marx devoted very little energy to elaborating a real theory of the destination itself…" (Burawoy &Wright, 2002, p. 462).

Applications

It has been argued that the course of capitalism in modern times does not support the central claims of Marx's theory because there is little evidence to uphold Marx's view of an inevitable tendency for classes to become organized as political groups around their own class interests: "Instead of becoming simplified and more polarized, class structures in capitalist societies are becoming more complex and differentiated" (Burawoy &Wright, 2002, p. 467). The concept of class, however, remains central to Marxian theory as it is applied to the United States and elsewhere.

Stratification in Contemporary America

There exists a significant difference in income, educational attainment, and occupational status among the American population (features often referred to in combination as socioeconomic status or SES). Marger (2008) presents a six-part class structure in the United States, consisting of:

• An upper or capitalist class,

• An upper-middle class,

• A lower-middle class,

• A working class, and

• A poverty population made up of the working poor and the underclass.

While most Americans view US class structure in more simplistic terms—small upper and lower classes and a huge middle class, (some might even argue that the United States is a classless society) —the reality is that there is great differentiation among classes, and striking inequality among Americans that ultimately translates into unequal distributions of society's resources.

The upper or capitalist class in Marger's (2008) model occupies positions of authority and societal power. The majority of its income comes primarily from returns on investments and other forms of property. The upper-middle class has income well above average, but it is their expertise and skill, which is critical to society's functioning, that is their distinctive trait. The lower-middle class is quite diverse, representing middle managers, craftpersons, and service workers. Their position in society is not one of authority or power. The working class or "blue collar" worker consists of those employed in manual labor jobs. This class is also diverse, representing skilled manual workers to sales clerks. These occupations provide the working class with a wage that is enough to maintain a standard of living to provide for the basic necessities, but provides few of the amenities available to the middle class. The poverty population, consisting of the working poor and underclass, represents those who are poor but work, as the name suggests, and those who remain in poverty long-term and rely on government welfare, respectively. It is the latter that is often referred to in sociological literature as the "marginalized" class.

The Power Elite

There is much debate about the power of the upper or capitalist class in America. This debate centers on Marx's argument that the ruling capitalist class dominates society (Shapiro, 2005). C. Wright Mills (as cited in Shapiro, 2005) argues that power is concentrated among a fairly small number of people who head three key institutions in society: giant corporations, the executive branch of government, and the military. These people are responsible for making society's most important decisions leaving everyone else with little or no decision-making authority. It is this "triangle of power" that Mills describes, which now in modern times, it is argued has come together to form the power elite in America. Mills states:

…certainly in the United States and in the Soviet Union today—a few men may be so placed within the structure that by their decisions they modify the milieux of many other men, and in fact nowadays the structural conditions under which most men live…I should contend that "men are free to make history," but that some men are indeed much freer than others. For such freedom requires access to the means of decision and of power by which history can now be made (as cited in Shapiro, 2005, p. 140).

If wealth and social status are valued in American society, then the upper or capitalist class, through its possession of a disproportionate amount of wealth and status, demonstrates its class power. Regarding class struggles within the contemporary US class system, conflict appears to have been averted in contradiction to Marx's predictions. The US class system has become more diverse in structure with a swelling of the middle class that weakens in some respect the split between the two extreme classes, capitalists and workers. Yet, inequality in the US does exist and continues to grow, especially the income gap between managers and workers. For example, in 2005, the typical CEO made 262 times more than the average worker; in other words, a CEO earned in just one day of work almost as much as the average worker earned in an entire year (Mishel et al., 2007, as cited in Marger, 2008). In 2013, Bloomberg Businessweek reported that the average CEO-to-worker pay ratio for companies listed in Standard & Poor’s 500 was 204; the average of the top 100 companies on Bloomberg’s Top CEO Pay Ratios table was 495 (Smith & Kuntz, 2013).

Conclusion

For Marx, such inequality is not part of the human condition, but in a capitalist society it is a fundamental characteristic. All societies throughout human history ultimately divide into two conflicting classes: the dominant ruling class who own the means of society's productive resources and workers who do not. Workers have no choice but to work for the ruling class. Thus, inequality is a product of the ownership of the means of production. Marx's theoretical contribution to the understanding of the origins and development of social class and stratification is likely to have lasting significance. By placing social class as the key ingredient in the process of societal conflict and change, his ideas remain relevant to contemporary sociology. Marx's theory has been the focus of much theoretical analysis, and its endurance is a testament of its strength. Whether or not the upper or capitalist class in the United States is truly a ruling class continues to be a subject of lively debate.

Terms & Concepts

Blue-Collar Workers: Those who work in manual occupations.

Bourgeoisie: In Marxian theory, the owners of the means of production or capital in a capitalist society. Also referred to as the capitalist class.

Capitalism: A system of economic production based on market principles and guided by the private ownership of property and the competitive pursuit of profit.

Capitalist Class: The class holding the top position in the stratification system, whose members obtain most of their income from investments and assets. In Marxian theory, the class that owns society's means of production. Also referred to as the bourgeoisie.

Class: A grouping of individuals with similar positions and similar political and economic interests within the stratification system. In Marxian theory, it is a dimension of social stratification based upon property ownership or lack of ownership.

Class Consciousness: Awareness among members of a class of their common economic and political interests in relation to other classes. In Marxian theory, it includes a class's capacity to act in its own interests, and it is a necessary precursor to a successful revolution.

Lower-Middle Class: An occupationally diverse class composed of middle-managers, semiprofessionals, craftpersons, and some types of service workers.

Lower Class: Individuals and families with no property, who are often unemployed and have no authority, and as a result are poor.

Means of Production: In Marxian theory, productive resources; i.e., things that are necessary to supply the society's economic needs such as the types of technology used to produce basic necessities and other valued goods.

Middle Class: Individuals and families with relatively little property but high-to-middle positions and authority in the class system. Further distinction is made with respect to upper-middle class (corporate managers, doctors, lawyers) and lower-middle class (salespeople, office workers).

Proletariat: In Marxian theory, the industrial working class; those who do not own the means of production.

Ruling Class: In Marxian theory, the class that controls the means of production, and as a result, the political system as well.

Socialism: A political theory or system in which a society's means of production are controlled by the people on the basis of equity rather than market principles. In Marxian theory, the stage emerging from capitalism that follows the proletarian movement as a society transitions to communism.

Social Stratification: The ranking of persons and groups on the basis of various social, and sometimes physical, characteristics; the vertical dimension of social structure, implying inequality. The condition in which layered hierarchy and inequality has been hardened or institutionalized, and there is a system of social relationships that determines who gets what, and why.

Socioeconomic Status (SES): A combination of income and wealth, occupation, and education.

Upper Class: Established families with significant ownership of major corporations and therefore, extensive authority and economic power flowing from such ownership.

Upper-Middle Class: Individuals and families with above-average income and who occupy managerial, professional, and technical positions.

Working Class: Individuals and families with little or no property, middle to low positions in occupation, and little or no authority.

Bibliography

Bowles, D. (2013). Toward an integrated theory of social stratification. American Journal Of Economics & Sociology, 72, 32-58. Retrieved October 25, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=84482932

Burawoy, M., & Wright, E.O. (2002). Sociological Marxism. In J.H. Turner (Ed.), Handbook of sociological theory (pp. 459-486). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

Freedman, R. (1990). The Marxist system: Economic, political, and social perspectives . Chatham, NJ: Chatham House Publishers.

Fundamentals of social stratification. (1999). In, Crisis in Sociology . Transaction Publishers. Retrieved March 19, 2008, from EBSCO online database, SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=6820945&site=ehost-live

Kerbo, H. R. (2006). Social stratification and inequality (6th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Llorente, R. (2013). Marx's concept of 'universal class': A rehabilitation. Science & Society, 77, 536-560. Retrieved October 25, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=90187864

Marger, M. N. (2008). Social inequality: Patterns and processes (4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Robinson, R.V., & Kelley, J. (1979). Class as conceived by Marx and Dahrendorf: Effects on income and inequality and politics in the United States and Great Britain. American Sociological Review, 44 , 38-58. Retrieved March 19, 2008, from EBSCO online database, SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=14753553&site=ehost-live

Shapiro, T.M. (2005). Great divides: Readings in social inequality in the United States (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Smith, E., & Kuntz, P. (2013). Disclosed: The pay gap between CEOs and employees. Businessweek.Com, 7. Retrieved October 25, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=87521279

Stratification, class, and status: The making of a class society. (2003). In, Sociology . pp. 702-716. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Tucker, R.C. (Ed.). (1972). The Marx-Engels reader . New York: W.W. Norton.

Wright, E.O. (1999, July). Foundations of class analysis: A Marxist perspective . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Chicago, IL. Retrieved March 19, 2008, from http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/~wright/Foundations.pdf

Suggested Reading

Archer, P., & Orr, R. (2012). Teaching & learning guide for: Class identification in review: Past perspectives and future directions. Sociology Compass, 6, 97-101. Retrieved October 25, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=70074459

Domhoff, G.W. (1983). Who rules America now? New York: Simon and Schuster.

Hetzler, S. (1953). An investigation of the distinctiveness of social classes. American Sociological Review, 18 , 493-497. Retrieved March 26, 2008, from EBSCO online database, SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=12786506&site=ehost-live

Mason, K. (2013). Social Stratification and the Body: Gender, Race, and Class. Sociology Compass, 7, 686-698. Retrieved October 25, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=89598987

Mills, C. (1958). The structure of power in American society. British Journal of Sociology, 9 , 29-41. Retrieved March 26, 2008, from EBSCO online database, SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=10388191&site=ehost-live

Wright, E. (1985). Classes . London: Verso.

Wright, E., Costello, C., Hachen, D., & Sprague, J. (1982). The American class structure. American Sociological Review, 47 , 709-726. Retrieved March 26, 2008, from EBSCO online database, SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=14753722&site=ehost-live