1c - Theoretical explanations of the patterns and trends, including explanations of the changing class structure – Functionalist, Marxist, Neo-Marxist, Weberian, Post-modern views.

Question 1

Marx

Answer 1

Karl Marx believed that Under capitalism there are only two classes: the capitalists (‘bourgeoisie’) who own the means of production and so they are in a highly privileged and powerful economic position and the workers (‘proletariat’) who, on the other hand, do not own productive property and so they can survive only by selling their labour power to employers. It is this basic division, between the owners of capital and the workers, which creates major conflicts. Social Inequality is caused when the bourgeoisie oppress and exploit the proletariat. There is a basic conflict of interests between bosses and workers, since it is in the employer’s interests to keep wages low in order to increase profits.

Question 2

Marx eval

Answer 2

Marx attached too much importance to economic factors. He treated the economic ‘base’ as primary in importance which implies that the dominant ideas of a society are little more than ideologies which help to maintain the economic position of capitalists. However, critics maintain that culture is not just a direct product of economic forces. Cultural conflicts (eg. around gender, nationalism or ethnicity) have their own reality and they cannot always be ‘reduced’ to economic issues.

Question 3

Gramsci (neo marxist)

Answer 3

Gramsci (1971) explains how capitalists use their superior resources (e.g. control of mass media and education) to win the hearts and minds of workers. They try to convince workers that the capitalist system is legitimate, normal and a matter of common sense. Gramsci called this ‘hegemony’: dominance by cultural and political means. Herbert Marcuse notes ‘the hypnotic power of the mass media deprives us of the capacity for critical thought which is essential if we are to change the world’.

Question 4

Gramsci (neo marxist) eval

Answer 4

However, it is not conclusively proven that the media are controlled by the bourgeoisie, nor that they intentionally set out to legitimate capitalism. McRobbie argues people are increasingly likely to be sceptical about media messages and use a multitude of media sources to make a sophisticated analysis of their own regarding each story.

Question 5

Marxist explanations of the changing class structure - Braverman

Answer 5

Braverman argued that many white collar workers were being deskilled, to such an extent that they could be considered ‘proletarian’ (working class). He called this process proletarianisation. Their skills were being eroded by automation, computerisation and the fragmentation of work tasks into simpler routines, and this had implications for their pay, status and power. Moreover, Braverman saw this deskilling as a deliberate management strategy. Under capitalism, employers wish to cut their costs and maximise their profits by replacing workers with machines.

Question 6

Marxist explanations of the changing class structure - Braverman eval

Answer 6

However, research evidence suggests that deskilling is patchy rather than universal. For example, Gallie et. al. (1998) surveyed a large national sample of workers who had been affected by new technologies and managerial strategies. Yet only a small minority reported that their jobs had been deskilled. Almost two thirds felt their jobs had been upskilled (to a modest extent), while a large minority reported no significant change.

Question 7

Marxist explanations of the changing class structure - Westergaard

Answer 7

Westergaard is concerned that whilst differences between the classes seem to have strengthened, the identification people have with their own social class seems to have weakened. He blames economic and social policies such as the way in which politicians have stopped using the term ‘social class’ to describe the population, instead focussing on ‘social exclusion’ e.g. single mothers, the poor, unemployed. Westergaard maintains that social class is still a very useful concept for sociologists as someone’s social class position effects every part of their life chances and class consciousness could yet be revived.

Question 8

Marxist explanations of the changing class structure - Westergaard eval

Answer 8

However, Westergaard’s point is opposed by Postmodernists who argue that class has indeed reduced in importance. Identity is now based on individual choices.

Question 9

Marxist explanations of the changing class structure - savage

Answer 9

Savage argues that the collective confidence of the working class is being undermined in contemporary society. At one time they saw themselves collectively as strong and independent, in contrast to the servile, dependent people who worked in the ‘office’. But Savage argues that there has been a cultural shift. Nowadays the working class are no longer in powerful trade unions, and the jobs they have seem somehow less ‘heroic’ and Manual labour has suffered a loss in status

Question 10

Weberian theory (social action theory) (more than class) class

Answer 10

Class (market position). Weber treated social class as basically an economic matter. He agreed that ownership (or non-ownership) of productive property is an important basis for class formation but Weber moved away from Marx’s two-class model. Instead, he chose to define class in terms of position in the economic marketplace. The market consists of a great many positions which vary according to the source and amount of income, and differences in occupational skills and educational qualifications.

Question 11

Weberian theory (social action theory) (more than class) status

Answer 11

Status refers to the degree of honour or prestige which is attached to social groups in society. Different status groups compete with each other for a greater share of social esteem. Status, has more to do with social evaluation based on consumption styles than with production (how they earn money). So status groups are not quite the same thing as social classes. On the other hand, they are not always sharply separated.

Question 12

Weberian theory (social action theory) (more than class) party

Answer 12

Party When Weber talks about party he is referring to the exercise of power by pressure groups, political parties, trade unions and other organised interest groups. Parties can use their power to increase their economic wealth but Weber does not accept that economic wealth automatically confers power. For example, a politician or trade union leader might exercise greater power than a rich employer.

Question 13

Weberian theory (social action theory) eval

Answer 13

Marxists criticise Weber for making the issue too complicated and deemphasising the similarities the working class have. Marx argues that it is more important to see similarities rather than divisions between the proletariat, as only when they are united will they be successful in revolution. Weber is criticised for playing into the hands of the bourgeoisie by making the issue more complicated and therefore harder for the proletariat to understand.

Question 14

Weberian explanations of the changing class structure

Answer 14

If the Weberian’s are correct then the middle classes have fragmented and become many rather than one group. ONS classes 1 and 2 have expanded considerably in the postwar period as a result of transformations in the economic and occupational structure. Roberts (2001) describes the main values of professional and managerial groups. they see themselves as having a ‘service’ relationship with their employers and have a strong sense of ‘career’ and they expect to improve their salary by keeping their qualifications and expertise up to date. Further down the ONS system are self-employed and small employers who seem to have markedly different values to the professionals and mangers described above. They have work-centred lifestyles. They are the supreme champions of ‘individualism’ and hard work and discipline.

Question 15

Functionalism (a structural, consensus theory)

Answer 15

Functionalists believe that inequality is not really surprising or accidental in a country like Britain. Rather, it is something that is systematically generated by the way society is structured and organised. Moreover, a certain level of inequality is necessary or desirable. Indeed, many people seem to support the idea of a meritocracy. A meritocratic system assumes it is the task of social institutions (e.g. schools, workplace) to set up a ‘contest’ to identify and select the most talented people. Ideally the contest should be as fair as possible so that everyone can show their true merits. The victors in this contest are then rewarded with the prizes of higher income, status and power, thus creating an unequal society.

Question 16

Davis and Moore - Functionalism (a structural, consensus theory)

Answer 16

Davis and Moore observe that stratification is a permanent and universal feature of human societies and conclude that this is because it is functionally necessary. Stratification is inevitable because every society faces the task of ‘placing’ people. Functionalists call this role allocation. Also, it needs to motivate these people (they must perform their duties in a responsible and conscientious manner). In order to achieve this, societies offer higher rewards (eg income, status) for the most important jobs. Davis and Moore offer certain guidance on how we can identify these jobs. Normally they are ‘unique’ (no other occupation can substitute for them).

Question 17

Davis and Moore - Functionalism (a structural, consensus theory) eval

Answer 17

• Davis and Moore assume there is a general consensus on the pattern of rewards. How, then, do we explain the widespread resentment about the unequal distribution of income and wealth? Inequality is a continuing source of conflict in most modern societies
• Davis and Moore seem to regard power as a social resource which is distributed throughout society in such a way that it works for the common good. They overlook the way power is used as a weapon by some groups to further their own material interests.
• Some of the highest rewards go to wealthy people who do not really perform any ‘function’ at all but simply live off the interest payments on their wealth.

Question 18

Postmodernism - lyotard

Answer 18

Lyotard believes that grand narratives (theories to explain the world) are now useless since we live our lives as individuals and therefore post-modernists focus on the deconstruction of groups, instead seeing people as individuals. Lyotard believes computer technology has become the principle force of production (as opposed to Marxists who see are interested in the production of goods). He believes there is no such thing as an objective truth but a myriad of ideas which exist for the purpose of being sold. Ideas which are not saleable are not given status.

Question 19

Postmodernism - lyotard eval

Answer 19

Lyotard is criticised by Marxists for failing to criticise the negative impacts of capitalism, and for rejecting all other theories but then offering his own. He also offers little empirical evidence to back up his theory, nor is he able to explain why the post modernism has come about. Lyotard is criticised for failing to produce much empirical evidence to back up their theories.

Question 20

Postmodernism - Bauman

Answer 20

Bauman believes that contemporary society is divided by inequalities. These inequalities are based upon consumption rather than occupation or relation to the means of production. Bauman sees people who are unable to join the consumption culture of shopping as outcast by the rest of society. The poor are criminalised and ghettoised because they cannot compete in a world of consumption so they are seen as deviant and undesirable. Consumption becomes key to identity.

Question 21

Pakulski and Waters - Postmodern explanations of the changes to the social class structure

Answer 21

Pakulski and Waters argue that class diverts attention away from more important areas such as identity, race and gender. In their opinion, postmodern societies are no longer class societies, since production and the marketplace are now of minor significance. So class is more or less ‘dead’. Inequalities and conflicts still exist but they no longer run along class lines. People are slotted into British society according to their ‘status’ rather than their class. The old class identities have crumbled away in the face of postmodern social trends.

Question 22

Beck and Beck-Gernsheim - Postmodern explanations of the changes to the social class structure

Answer 22

Individualisation - One of the things that helped to make class identities so powerful in the past was their collective nature. However, some sociologists claim that class collectivism has weakened in the age of ‘late modernity’. Beck and Beck-Gernsheim describe the trend towards individualisation. Class traditions no longer seem so relevant or appealing in an age when people are increasingly forced to exercise personal choice and take their own individual decisions. Traditional certainties have collapsed and the old ‘fixed’ categories of class, religion and gender no longer provide detailed guidance on how people should lead their lives.

Question 23

Furlong and Cartmel - Postmodern explanations of the changes to the social class structure

Answer 23

Furlong and Cartmel accept that contemporary Britain resembles a postmodern society in important respects. In the past, the metaphor of a railway journey captured the way young people’s lives were shaped by social class. Within the school, working class and middle class children boarded different trains bound for different destinations. Once on the track, there was little opportunity to switch destinations or to change trains. Nowadays, in contrast, the journey from class origins to class destinations is more likely to be taken by car. In this new postmodern world, young people are constantly faced by choices and they have to make lots of individual decisions: where shall I head? which route shall I take? How many stops will I make?

Question 24

Postmodern explanations of the changes to the social class structure eval - Westergaard

Answer 24

Westergaard rejects the idea that social class is no longer important. He accepts that people’s class consciousness may have declined but their class position has in fact hardened. By this he means that increased polarisation has led to the class differences between people strengthening instead of loosening. Westergaard observes ‘new’ divisions are always connected to class in some way. For example, many of the disadvantages suffered by women and ethnic minorities are essentially ‘class’ matters of income, wealth and power.

Question 25

Postmodern explanations of the changes to the social class structure eval - Marshall

Answer 25

Marshall (1997) maintains that the pronouncements of postmodern theorists rest on ‘data free’ sociology. He carried out a large survey and found that about 60 per cent of the sample thought of themselves as belonging to a particular social class and over 90 per cent could place themselves in a class if prompted. These figures hardly suggest that class awareness has disappeared.

Question 26

Postmodern explanations of the changes to the social class structure eval - Savage

Answer 26

Savage (2000) is not convinced by the postmodernist argument that class is now outdated and irrelevant. On the contrary, he thinks class remains massively important. structurally, class is as important as ever, possibly even more important than it was thirty years ago. He claims there is abundant evidence to show that patterns of economic and social inequality are marked in Britain, and that it makes good sense to see them in terms of class.

Question 27

Weberian explanations of the changing class structure - New working classes

Answer 27

Many sociologists believe that the working classes have been divided into two distinct groups - the traditional proletarian working class, as described by Young and Willmott, and the New Working Class, as described Goldthorpe and Lockwood

Question 28

Weberian explanations of the changing class structure - Traditional working class - Young and Wilmott

Answer 28

Work - Men - heavy industries / physically demanding nature of work / high value on rugged masculinity and male camaraderie. Women - full time housewives
Class consciousness - Strong sense of class solidarity. 'Proletarian' views / loyalties to trade unions and Labour Party. Distrusted ‘them’: bosses, middle classes, anyone in authority.	
Community - Close knit communities ('urban villages'). Long connections with their locality / large circles of friends and acquaintances.

Question 29

Weberian explanations of the changing class structure - New working class - Goldthorpe and Lockwood

Answer 29

Work - Instrumental attitude to work – motivated by pay not pride. Women now working too. Job security declined. Pride in jobs declined – service sector?
Class consciousness - TU and Labour party membership fallen dramatically – less solidarity. Divisions emerge – some getting much richer and others falling into poverty.
Community - Communities more fragmented – privatisation of the family due to increased need for geographical mobility to find jobs

Question 30

Weberian explanations of the changing class structure - Neo-Weberian Hutton

Answer 30

has warned that Britain is dividing into a 40/30/30 society. The top 40% of the working population are privileged (in full-time and secure employment), the next 30% are insecure or marginalised (in part-time or precarious work), and the remaining 30% are disadvantaged (unemployed or economically inactive). According to Hutton these divisions within the labour market are creating massive problems, as large numbers have been condemned to conditions of permanent stress and insecurity.

Question 31

Weberian explanations of the changing class structure - eval 1 - Definitions of class

Answer 31

Marxists define classes in terms of ownership of the means of production (basically a two-class model), whereas Weberians see classes as positions in the market place (allowing for a wider range of classes). Marxists say Weberians identify too many trivial market-based classes and this merely distracts attention from the basic split between capitalists and workers.

Question 32

Weberian explanations of the changing class structure - eval 2 - View of history

Answer 32

Marx saw history as a long march towards the final goal of a communist society where class antagonisms would no longer exist. But Weber was sceptical about the possibility of a classless society and he regarded stratification as a more or less permanent source of conflict in every society.

Question 33

Social class intro

Answer 33

Social inequality refers to any differences between individuals and groups that are reflected in inferior chances in life for one of those groups. In regards to class this might simply mean the unequal distribution of money so that some people are rich and others are poor, or it could mean inequalities in income, education, health, housing, the law etc

Question 34

Neo marxists intro

Answer 34

Marx died over a century ago and it is unfair to expect him to have predicted every development since then. Neo-Marxism is the term used to describe the work of later Marxists. They have taken Marx’s ideas in many different directions and there is no single neo-Marxist approach. Most seem to agree that culture deserves far more serious attention than it was given by ‘classical’ Marxists.

Question 35

Marxist conclusion

Answer 35

Wilkinson and Pickett explain that polarisation and inequality is bad for everyone as it increases social alienation. They show that levels of mental illness, alcoholism, teen pregnancy, loneliness and a range of other social problems rise in countries with high inequality.

Question 36

Weber intro

Answer 36

Weber agreed with Marx that there is a system of stratification in place, however he came to different conclusions about how classes are differentiated from one another. He believed that instead of simply looking at the relationship to the means of production (as Marx does) one should consider the distinction between class, status and party.

Question 37

Weber conclusion

Answer 37

Barron and Norris argue that the labour market is divided into two sectors, a primary sector consisting of secure, well-paid jobs with good prospects and a secondary sector characterised by poor pay, insecurity and no ladder of promotion. It is very difficult to move from the secondary to the primary sector.

Question 38

Functionalists intro

Answer 38

Functionalist sociologists often draw a comparison between society and the human body. The body consists of separate but interdependent parts, each part playing a specialised role which contributes to overall physical wellbeing.