There are very few ideas which are closely linked with Marxism as the concepts of class and class conflict. Therefore, it is impossible to imagine what a Marxist philosophy of history or a Marxist revolutionary theory would be in their absence. Hence, as with much else in Marxism, these two concepts remain abstruse and contradictory at all times. Some scholars may argue that, Marx didn't provide any coherent or unique understanding or conception of class and class struggle. In this paper, I would try to explain the origin of the concept of " class " on Marxist theories and how it is developed. The paper argues that in Marxist doctrine, the concept of class is grounded in the process of production and the working class.
Download Free PDF View PDF
The conflict theory was founded by Karl Marx and then developed by Max Weber. This theory is applied to all phenomena including history. Application of the theory is named as social conflict theory according to which; there are different classes in societies and powerful groups exploit the less powerful groups through using power. According to Marx, we are living the capitalist system since particularly late the 19th Century and the opposite groups in the current world order are mainly working class composed of workers and bourgeoisie. Marx argues that mankind will reach communist society in the end. K. Marx considers the proletariat as the main dynamic of a revolution by the working class. In 1989, Francis Fukuyama writes a very important article which argues declares the invincible victory of liberalism over socialism which some parts of the world had experienced during the 20th Century. Fukuyama's theory is formulated as "the end of the history". Fukuyama refers to some events namely the Fall of Berlin Wall and dissolution of Soviet Bloc as the grounds for his argument. He interprets these events from liberal sides in the late 20th century. Yet, there are some other social incidents, which disapprove the theory of Fukuyama. Social movements, which protest inequalities, economic problem, take place once again when we come last period of the century. This paper aims to discuss emergence of new actors, namely women and children workers, in the class struggle or the history of conflict. Position and importance of these new actors for the history of class struggle will be analysed in depth. This paper will analyse theories both by Marx and by Fukuyama from a critical perspective since the both thinkers have similar position regarding invisible actors (women and child labour) of the dynamics of history though they reach opposite conclusions.
Download Free PDF View PDF
Download Free PDF View PDF
Download Free PDF View PDF
Download Free PDF View PDF
Critique: Journal of Socialist Theory
Marx’s analysis of the concept of class in chapter 52 of Capital Volume III is unfortunately far from being complete. This paper aims at reconstructing a Marxian conceptualisation of class on the basis of Marx’s own writings and with the aid of representatives of creative Soviet Marxism such as Evald Ilyenkov and contemporary Western critical theory, specifically the Open Marxism approach and Werner Bonefeld. It proposes that class is not a sociological entity signifying a group or a stratum in society. Rather, it is a fluid being that is logically preceded by its conceptuality: class is a continuously constituted social relation that is mediated politically; it is the mode of being of the human basis of capitalist social relations of production.
Download Free PDF View PDF
The concept of class has greater explanatory ambitions within the Marxist tradition than in any other tradition of social theory and this, in turn, places greater burdens on its theoretical foundations. In its most ambitious form, Marxists have argued that class – or very closely linked concepts like " mode of production " or " the economic base " – was at the center of a general theory of history, usually referred to as " historical materialism ". 1 This theory attempted to explain within a unified framework a very wide range of social phenomena: the epochal trajectory of social change as well as social conflicts located in specific times and places, the macro-level institutional form of the state along with the micro-level subjective beliefs of individuals, large scale revolutions as well as sit-down strikes. Expressions like " class struggle is the motor of history " and " the executive of the modern state is but a committee of the bourgeoisie " captured this ambitious claim of explanatory centrality for the concept of class. Most Marxist scholars today have pulled back from the grandiose explanatory claims of historical materialism (if not necessarily from all of its explanatory aspirations). Few today defend stark versions of " class primacy. " Nevertheless, it remains the case that class retains a distinctive centrality within the Marxist tradition and is called upon to do much more arduous explanatory work than in other theoretical traditions. Indeed, a good argument can be made that this, along with a specific orientation to radically egalitarian normative principles, is a large part of what defines the continuing distinctiveness and vitality of the Marxist tradition as a body of thought, particularly within sociology. It is for this reason that I have argued that " Marxism as class analysis " defines the core agenda of Marxist sociology. 2 The task of this chapter is to lay out the central analytical foundations of the concept of class in a way that is broadly consistent with the Marxist tradition. This is a tricky business, for among writers who identify with Marxism there is no consensus on any of the core concepts of class analysis. What defines the tradition is more a loose commitment to the importance of class analysis for understanding the conditions for challenging capitalist oppressions and the language within which debates are waged – what Alvin Gouldner aptly called a " speech community " – than a precise set of definitions and propositions. Any claims about the theoretical foundations of Marxist class analysis which I make, therefore, will reflect my specific stance within that tradition rather than an authoritative account of " Marxism " in general or of the work of Karl Marx in particular. 3 There will be two principle punchlines to the analysis: first, that the ingredient that most sharply distinguishes the Marxist conceptualization of class from other traditions is the concept of " exploitation " , and second, that an exploitation-centered concept of class provides theoretically powerful tools for studying a range of problems in contemporary
Download Free PDF View PDF
