Karl Marx is undoubtedly the most prominent and well-known figure in anti-capitalist literature. His most famous piece of work, ‘The Communist Manifesto’, goes into very close detail about the class struggle and the exploitation by the few of the many. This essay will go into detail about Marx’s characterization of the relationships between classes in capitalist society. By looking at his thoughts on economic, social, and personal implications of the relationships between different classes in capitalism it will be much easier to understand Marx’s true characterization of the relationships between classes and ultimately what this means for future society.
To understand Marx’s characterization of class relationships, it is important to understand that class struggle is not a new thing. Since the dawn of society, people have been grouped into different sub-sections of society based on a numerus array of characteristics. Mostly, this has led to a hierarchical structure with some at the top commanding those below. A good example would be the feudal system which was prevalent for many centuries. This is where the King would have ultimate power at the top of the proverbial food chain with lower ranking members having control of those lower and so on leading eventually to simple peasants who had no power at all. This eventually, in most Western societies, gave way to capitalism. This was thanks to power eventually spreading to be attainable for all, with entrepreneurs being able to build power for themselves. The feudal system had died out almost everywhere at the time Marx was writing, except in Russia where serfdom still thrived. One of Marx’s key teachings is that if a group are left at the bottom of the hierarchy for too long, they will fight back. This was done in most Western countries through industrial revolution where the new technology allowed workers to band together to form societies, ultimately creating the capitalist society we now live in.
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
Marx’s main critique of the class structure in a capitalist society is the economic implication of the exploitation of the workforce by the proletariat. Marx’s thoughts on the means of production queried that the laborers do not own the products or commodities that they labor to create.
They do not own the means to their own production. The individualistic effort of the many are stolen by the few simply for their own economic gain. Thus, those doing the work receive little compensation in the form of wages for the amount that they essentially gift to those who are further up the company ladder than them. Simply, business in capitalist society thrives on inequality. Due to this fact of capitalist economics, Marx details how this does create friction in the relationship between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. The poor relationship between the two classes on an economic basis can mostly be seen through workers’ protests and strikes. A workers’ strike is a clear reprehension of the classist system that exists in a capitalist society. Taking, for instance, the Delano Grape strike in the 1960s. In California, a small group of grape farmers started a strike against poor pay. Cesar Chavez, a popular civil rights activist in the area joined the cause, starting the United Farm Workers Union. The protest spread to the whole nation. This led to the grape growers relenting in 1970 improving pay dramatically. This is a great example of the power that the proletariat holds over the bourgeoisie. Marx talks often about the economic relationship between the classes in capitalist society relying solely on those who labor for the commodities that are traded in free markets. Therefore, Marx characterizes the economic relationship between classes as the proletariat being the ones in control but rarely empowered to seize the means to production.
In Marx and Engels ‘Communist Manifesto’ it is proclaimed that “society as a whole is more and more splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing each other”. Marx perceived from a societal standpoint that social classes in a capitalist society were pitted in strong opposition to each other. Marx split society into three societal class groups. There is the upper, middle, and lower classes and what class in the hierarchical order you fit into comes down to your economic status and property situation. The upper class were prosperous and powerful, owning property and often businesses. They were afforded the luxuries in life and did minimal work for high rewards. Marx significantly categorized class based on ownership of property rather than monetary reputation. Therefore, in the class groups there is a clear focus on how powerful the people are. The more property one has consistently equates to power over others. For instance, someone owning three properties including a factory will be able to afford the price of human labor, giving them power over those who need to see their labor to make a living and support their families. The relationship consequently breaks down between classes because in a capitalist society the aim for those in the upper class is to maintain power. The only way to do this in the current social structure is by keeping those below them down, making sure those in lower classes stay in the lower classes.
Marx’s theory of alienation is poignant when looking at the sociological implications of a capitalist society. His theory details the disillusionment of human nature and the role they play in society. Marx argues that this is down to the simple fact that people are thrust into bedded social classes from birth with little chance to change their fate. Becoming part of the capitalist machine where commodities and money are the only things that matter grind down a person’s will to self-determination, ultimately leading to an alienation of the self. The major point that Marx brings up though is that before capitalism laborers took pride in their own work as they owned their means to production. Individuality was portrayed in a significant way through the products that the laborers would create. However, in a capitalist society this individuality through labor is replaced by the laborer becoming perceived as almost non-human, just a tool for the bourgeoisie to exploit. Thus, this crucial part of human nature is stolen from people in a capitalist society. Personal implications of capitalism have led in recent times to the rapid increase in celebrity culture. Reality TV shows like ‘Keeping Up’ with the Kardashians are so popular because they give those who have become alienated from their own human nature a chance to almost live through others who are further up the class hierarchy. Therefore, looking at the personal implications of the relationship between classes in capitalism it is clear to see that the relationship is, once again, characterized by exploitation.
To conclude, Marx holds an extensive volume of literature about class struggles in capitalist society, leaving no base uncovered when it comes to the relationships between the classes. Looking at the economic, social, and personal implications that Marx pertains that a classist capitalist society has, there is an overriding trend of exploitation of the upper classes on those lower than them, predominantly for simple financial gain. The relationship comes down to a simple fact of those on top wanting to remain on top and those on the bottom having little to no power to stop their own exploitation. This, in turn, is the reason that we live in such a segregated society in the modern era. Marx’s social theory still holds up today, perhaps even more than when he was writing. Highlighted by areas being classed as rich or poor depending on how much property costs in that area. Money controls everyday life in modern society with people held in such high regard for being rich. Just looking at the traffic that things like the Forbes rich list get, it is easy to see that people care about those who are rich while those who make people like Richard Branson his millions simultaneously are looked down upon.
Stuck on your essay?
