Karl Marx And Alexis De Tocqueville

Karl Marx and Max Weber were influential sociologists that paved the way for modern sociological school of thought. Both, Karl Marx and Max Weber contributed a lot to the study and foundation of sociology. Without their contributions sociology would not be as prominent as it is today. From the contribution of how sociology should be studied, to how they applied their theories to everyday life has influenced many sociologists. Predominantly, both of these theorists’ discussed the effects of capitalism, how it has developed, shaped and changed society into what it is today. Specifically, Karl Marx’s contribution of the bourgeoisie vs. the proletariat class and Max Weber’s social stratification has helped individuals to understand how modern day society has transformed into what it is today. Particularly, this paper will lie out Weber’s theory of social stratification and Marx’s theory of the bourgeoisie vs. the proletariat class; additionally this essay will also compare and contrast the ideas of these two influential sociologists. Finally this essay will criticize both of these sociologists’ theories and display that Marx and Weber do not explain how modern day society and classes have been formed.

In the conceptualization of the predominant 19th century political thought process, none- if any- were more influential than John Stuart Mill and Karl Marx. Both were philosophers, sociologists, economists and political thinkers, but each held unique views towards the ideal government, to freedom, and to the impact of the industrial revolution. Each discussed some of the ramifications of the industrial revolution, and the ways in which the government can be re-aligned for greater social prosperity. John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) advocated for Liberalism, a system in which liberty and equality would remain at the forefront of all political proposals, and representative interests. Mill celebrated individuality, and the ability to not conform to a higher power. In contrast to Mill, Karl Marx (1818-1883) was a revolutionary socialist who advocated for a complete social revolution throughout society, in an effort to counter the ill perceived effects of capitalism. Marx’s central tenet relied upon the fact that he sought to abolish private property, and monopolies, so as to enable all individuals to acquire an equitable means of living. Marx’s belief was that capitalism forces the economy into constantly being exploited, which in turn leads to recessions. Mill believed that all power should be allocated to the individual; whereas Marx believed that bestowing such power within a socialist regime would allow for the creation of a truly egalitarian society. This paper will analyze how

Tocqueville and Marx both argue for an egalitarian modern society, but their idea of equality of modern social order differs, which leads to two distinctive conclusions, democracy for former and communism for latter, which is adopted by different nations in the world. Both social theorists place high importance in analysing the history of society to determine modern social order, but have differing conceptions of history that leads to their contrasting views on the fundamental nature of the capitalist society, and their distinct predictions for the future. This essay will examine Tocqueville’s and Marx’s conceptions of history and through it, understand the nature of capitalist society, and comprehend their predictions for an ideal modern state. Using their analysis, I shall argue that Marx’s prediction of the future is more compelling as compared to Tocqueville.

Marx viewed society as a conflict between two classes in competition for material goods. He looked at the history of class conflicts and determined that the coming of the industrial age was what strengthened the capitalist revolution. Marx called the dominant class in the capitalist society the bourgeoisie and the laborers the proletariat. The bourgeoisie owned or controlled the means of production, exploited laborers, and controlled the goods produced for its own needs. He believed that the oppressed class of laborers was in a position to organize itself against the dominating class. He felt that it was the course of nature, that is, it is the way that society evolves and that the communist society would be free of class conflict, "the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all." (Marx & Engels 1948, 37)

During the 19th century, Europe underwent political and economic change resulting in a shift from craft production to factory work. This was a time known as the Industrial Revolution, in which class division and wage labor were the most foregrounded aspects of society (Poynton). Karl Marx’s theories during this time gave way to new perspectives and different ways of viewing oneself in class positions. Comparisons between social and political structures in the 19th century and the 21st century expose the similarities that have yet to be modified. Marxist theory proved to offer a framework for society to undergo evolutionary change that would put an end to the capitalist mode of production that developed during the Industrial Revolution in Europe (Connelley). Marxism greatly outlines the struggle between different classes and groups belonging to the political world and how this class struggle affects the means of production. Broadly speaking, capitalism is a structure of political inequality and once overcome will lead to communism, inevitably weakening the boundary between classes. Although beneficial for the workers who want to live as free men, the upper class will be placed on that same wavelength. The greater political structure will form into a realm that will abolish the exploitation and oppression of workers, thus placing power in the hands of those who do not benefit from the unequal distribution of wealth. It involves a combination of political and economic factors

Karl Marx (1818 – 1883) was a revolutionary German economic theorist and communist with many publications on sociology, economics and politics. Many of his writings can be used and applied into the media. Marx stated that in prehistoric times, people had no concept of private ownership, and everything was shared freely. There was no government to rule over everyone, but small tribes of people who each had their own leaders. This was known as primitive communism. As time went by, people became greedy and craved wealth. Private ownership of land led to the class system developing, with the upper class owning the land that the lower classes lived on and worked off. This became the feudal system, which was headed by a king. This system suited the upper class however it also meant that the lower class was always kept at the bottom, with no way of moving up from their positions. Industrialisation in the 1700’s meant that power in society fell into the hands of the wealthy, as they owned the land and had the money to build factories,

The Industrial Revolution (1750-1850) had brought about significant changes in agriculture, mining, manufacturing, transportation and technology and subsequently established an era of unprecedented economic growth in capitalist economies. It was within this era that Karl Marx had observed the deprivation and inequality experienced by men of the proletariat, the working class, who had laboured excessively for hours under inhumane conditions to earn a minimum wage while the bourgeoisie, the capitalist class, reaped the benefits. For Marx it was this fundamental inequality within the social and economic hierarchy that had enabled capitalist societies to function. While Marx’s theories, in many instances have been falsified and predictions

Throughout The Communist Manifesto, Marx expresses the political, economic and social turmoil that were present in their society. During this time period, agriculture production was the main occupation. This resulted in a class struggle between the landowners and the serfs who labored the land. A new, manufacturing class emerged from this conflict called the bourgeoisie. Bourgeoisie changed the focus from agriculture to industrialization and commerce. Having “less dexterity and strength [that] is required in manual labor, [helps] modern industry develop” and prosper throughout society (Marx 131). This more proficient way to produce commodities helped the bourgeoisie control global and domestic trade. They eventually reached a point where they were inhibited by the feudal government and could not progress at the original rate they were going. Resulting from this, the French Revolution occurred and the bourgeoisie demolished the aristocracy that was originally present during this primitive time. Unfortunately, this did not resolve the primary

When reading Marx and Tocqueville one may find that both seem to stand on opposite ends of a spectrum. While Tocqueville, as a social theorist, appears to value stability in political systems over all else (Ratcliff, 2014), Marx believes revolutions are the way for which the history of humankind can progress, and that the end of history will arise from the revolt of the people for a communist society (Ratcliff, 2014). Indeed, while both Marx and Tocqueville value liberty and equality, their notions of the two are fundamentally different, resulting in different ideas of the political manifestations of these two ideals. This essay will explore the motivations behind the two works, compare the two conceptions of liberty and equality, and show why Marx and Tocqueville arrive at very different conclusions.

Three of sociology’s most famous theorists, including W.E.B. Du Bois, Max Weber, and Karl Marx, pay due attention to the discussion of inequality within the context of race and class. Marx is focused on the role of the state and capital in generation of different forms of inequality. Marx believes that social inequality is caused by the dominant role of the elite class over the working class. This fact means that the proper strategies aimed at protection of a better life for the majority of people should be based on inevitable confrontations with a large number of social institutions. According to Marx, “the more productive capital grows, the more the division of labor and the application of machinery expands” (p. 65). The theorist believes that social change is driven by class conflict, which is connected with the division of labor. The exploiting and exploited classes are involved in this conflict. W.E.B. Du Bois is interested in the study of numerous stereotypes about African Americans, as well as racist assumptions, to assess their impact on inequality. He emphasizes the significance of grasping the socially constructed nature of race relations in the U.S. society. Du Bois (2009) states that “America is not a successful democracy” because of racism that still exists in the U.S. society (p. 125). Max Weber, a contemporary to Du Bois, investigates the various consequences and possible implications of bureaucracy, which is one of the major organizational forms of modern

Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Friedrich Nietzsche are both prominent figures of Modern Political thought even though they lived more than a hundred years apart from each other. Rousseau and Nietzsche tend to differ from each other in terms of their views on what we now call “globalization”.

Karl Marx came up later with a theory of a classless society to help the working class fight back. Marx came up with many radical ideas to change the way society was proceeding socially which, caused him to be banished from his native land in Germany and then from France, eventually he ended up in England. (Compton's Encyclopedia, 121) Karl Marx believed that social conflict was needed for society to function. He showed people not to be scared of conflict but rather to except it as a way of life. Karl Marx believes that people have a "class consciousness" which means that people are aware of differences between one another and that it causes a separation between groups of people. People mostly look at material objects for a sense of class status. If you are wealthy in life then you have many material objects and if you are poor then you have very little. People need to be educated in order to move up in society, which is why the working class people rarely have a chance to be very successful. Karl Marx realized that the working class deserved more then they were receiving and he tried to help the situation. Marx wanted the wealthy people and the poor to become more economically equal in status. Karl Marx also discusses the economic issues that the working class faces with change. With capitalism growing there is a greater need for production in the factories. More products need to be produced and at

Karl Marx, also a philosopher was popularly known for his theories that best explained society, its social structure, as well as the social relationships. Karl Marx placed so much emphasis on the economic structure and how it influenced the rest of the social structure from a materialistic point of view. Human societies progress through a dialectic of class struggle, this means that the three aspects that make up the dialectic come into play, which are the thesis, antithesis and the synthesis (Avineri, 1980: 66-69). As a result of these, Marx suggests that in order for change to come about, a class struggle has to first take place. That is, the struggle between the proletariat and the capitalist class, the class that controls

Both Karl Marx and Max Weber assert that capitalism is the dominion of abstractions and the irrational accumulation of abstract wealth for the sake of wealth. For Marx, the state of capitalism is entrenched in the social classes to which people have bben assigned. Capitalism, according to Marx, is a result of the bourgeoisie 's ascent to economic and political power. This fuels the manifestation of a system that exploits the labour power of the lower socioeconomic classes for the gain of the higher socioeconomic classes. Weber understands the state of capitalism to be the end product of the work ethic of the Protestant branches of Christianity and the secularization of Protestant puritanism, which helped fuel rationalism. Capitalism, according to Weber, is to be understood as the relations and methods of production and commodities, now rationalized. Ultimately, Marx ascribes the ascent of capitalism to the exploitation of people and power, while stressing that such a system can be overcome by a communist revolution, whereas Weber states that such a system is the result of cultural choices and is not as convinced that capitalism can be overcome.

“The history of all hitherto existing societies is the history of class struggles” (Marx, pg. 96), explains that all history displays society as a constant battle between the well off and the have not's. We see the oppressor and oppressed in constant opposition to each other. This fight is sometimes hidden and sometimes open. However, each time the fight ends in either a revolutionary reconstruction of society or in the classes' common ruin. Therefore, the system of socialism would be ushered in and gradually evolve into pure communism, or a classless society. This pushed forward change within the society.