Social Class Is an Issue That Draws Controversy - Essay Example

Social is an issue that draws controversy in relation to its definition following the large number of definitions from different sociologists creating the definitions. As such, this essay seeks to define social classes based on Weber and Marx and their understanding while using Bourdieu’s theories on class distinctions in the United Kingdom. In addition, different social classes shall be mentioned, as well as the standards applied in order to group society into different social classes. Max Weber on social theory refers to social stratification based on social theories that receive little attention in his line of work. His theory revolves around the concept of class status and party, through which he attempts to resolve the issues of social classes by explaining how the three influence social stratification across the world (Gane 2005, p.211). As such, the three aspects shall be used to analyze the situation in the United Kingdom. The three aspects of social l stratification have also been used to discern social stratification based on the distribution of power within the political community. It is through his philosophy in the issues of class status and party that show how the society is defined concerning its various structural forms, where power factor refers to the completion of political powers. Weber’s definition of social class dwells on the demarcation of the three spheres of society, where class is a non-social form, and status groups, as well as parties remain to be viewed as the modes of associative or communal socialization that go beyond state and national boundaries (Gane 2005, p.211). His conceptualization of the issues surrounding party status and party creates an opportunity for new ideas and thoughts in relation to social structure and competition for social and political power. His philosophies go deeper to define social class as an intrinsic social institution or entity by labeling and referring to it as a status group and class. As such, his suppositions are that social class is based on cultural values, as opposed to the economic interests that are found in the ideologies and philosophies of Karl Max in defining and describing social classes and issues. Weber declares that a social class is the largest component, if not the only component in the totality of class situations in which individual and generational mobility is found (Gane 2005, p.213). Weber goes on further to label the main class groupings as the working class, petty bourgeoisie, property less intelligentsia and technical specialists and the final group known as the privileged through property and education (Gane 2005, p.218). The above social classes are used to prove social stratification based on Weber’s theories as a major typology. The above named classes also come into play in their relation to class party and status since they directly touch on each other, where those without education or property are left without status or a claim to power (which is covered by party). In addition, Weber defines a class as a non-social aspect or entity, where he analyzes the distribution of power throughout a class status and party. As such, his definition of power in social classes has nothing to do with economic wellbeing as found in the Marxist theory, but rather dwells on the political and cultural power. Therefore, for him the basis of social classes relies heavily on the interests of the said classes rather than what they can or cannot do because the interests of the social classes define the existence of a market. This is to say that classes are not communities, despite the influence of social interests influencing social behavior, but rather are a form of a subjective feeling of belonging due to cultural or effectual grounds (Gane 2005, p.216). Due to this, social classes exist by themselves by do not exist for themselves as they are required to have people and take care of their interests. Karl Max the founder of Marxism created a philosophy based on economic doctrine and social revolution. As such, the economic theory is based on a well-defined system, which is structured as a logical array revolving around the notions of value and surplus value (Milios et al 2002, p.42). Te theory is deeply embedded in the theory of class struggles, which is crucial to his definition of social classes, where he rejects all forms of traditional, theoretical and philosophical humanism. The humanism rejected in the above case refers to a belief that individual human nature is the main determinant of form and evolution patterns of societies. This is also similar to the Weberian theory on determining social patterns only that Weber is strongly against the ideas of Karl Max. His definition of classes borrows and relies heavily on the classical political economy by drawing away from humanist anthropological foundations of political economy. As such, the class in which any given individual lives is based on their integration, which is an initial condition meaning that social class is a pre-existing disposition in a society based on the economic factor of an individual. In the conflict issue of social classes, Marx demonstrates the element of antagonism within social classes in a capitalist society, which is all based on economic value of individuals as they compete to have the highest amount of power in a society. Due to this, social classes to Karl Max are economic entities divided into those that are comfortable with their social-economic disposition (capitalists) and those that compete against them (wage-laborers). The division shows a fight for power concerning social control, where power is that of the ruling class against the dominated. As such, classes in society are perceived as social relations and practices, rather than groups of individuals sharing common characteristics in economic power. As a result, class practices have nothing to do with the ability to be conscious over common interests amongst subjects who stay under the likelihood of facing oppression and exploitation. It is due to this that social classes strive to avert the realization of common class goals between those in power and those that are subjects (Milios et al 2002 p.4). In addition to Karl’s theory of class struggle between the different social classes, Karl is of the opinion that certain societies have class relations that do not belong to the same form of class power, as they constitute of different class systems. As such, the class system follows the earlier mentioned system of social power where there are the leaders with social power and the dominated. However, the two groups are further stratified based on their materialism and historical background. However, it should be noted that this has nothing to do with the culture in spite of the use of historical backgrounds in discerning social classes. This is especially so for the capitalist system, which is permanent and bases its notions on production and political power. In addition, Karl Max places ideas in social classes as being wrong, as they are perceived to be repetitions of dominant ideas that are not created independently, but rather as a form of plagiarism of other people’s thoughts (“Karl Marx and Marxism” n.d., p.3). Due to this, there is little to do with culture in discerning the definition of social classes as social class relies on the concept of material wealth and capitalism. Bourdieu attempts at combining different forms of sociological ideologies in order to come with a single accepted social idea. This is by borrowing ideas from Emile Durkheim, Max Weber, and Karl Max, where he combines the different social ideologies to create a new means of analyzing the society in a critical manner. In his works, he involves the use of social capitalism and economic capitalism as ideas borrowed from other sociologists such as Weber on the earlier mentioned multicultural approach on social classes and that of Karl Marx on materialism. From the two mentioned above, Bourdieu considers society as having a set of acquired patterns of thought, behavior and taste, which work hand in hand with social structures and social practices. As such, cultural approaches are possible on the structure of the society, especially considering the role of historical culture on these aspects. Bourdieu discerns capital as a form of power in a society, where he defines capital as accumulated labor, which, when appropriated on a private, exclusive, basis by agents or groups enables the, to appropriate social energy in the form of reified or living labor (“Three approaches to social capital”n.d, p.2). As a result, Bourdieu defines social capital as “the sum of the resources, actual or virtual that accrue to an individual by virtual of possessing a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintances and recognition” (“Three approaches to social capital” n.d, p.2). This definition placed in the contemporary UK society appears as the current social institutions and networks of social interactions. With this in mind, the definition depicts the social inequities found in the society, by which social networks are the basis on which things get accomplished in society. This is taken to mean that the knowledge of the people is less important as compared to social networks, where knowing people is the norm and is the main determinant of how actions and activities are accomplished. Social capital is a tool used by the elite in the society to ensure that their group of elites does not increase or swell in numbers. This is because they use social capital to keep unwanted people out of their elite circle. As such, the corporate world could be a perfect example in the British society where not everyone or anyone can own and run a successful business without going through bureaucratic and socially imposed hurdles to filter out the unwanted. As a result, it is a force-binding people together based on their judgments and opinions of each other and their worthiness to be in the said groups (Ozturk n.d, p.257). Bourdieu’s concept of economic capital dwells on the Marxist theory of materialism, where it is used to refer to capital that can be easily converted into money. In addition to the use of social capital, the monarch is a closely guarded affair in which few people are part of considering it is based on family ties. The family ties act as a weapon against the lower classes in the UK society, since one cannot just be a part of the ruling class since one is not part of the royal family. The society in the United Kingdom is divided into classes of the main social strata that are recognized officially. These include the upper class, which is made up of people who own inherited wealth and has some of the oldest families, and most of the said families are aristocrats (Barrow n.d). The second social class is that of the middle class, which makes up a bulk of the UK population as it is made up of industrialists, entrepreneurs, professionals and business people. The third and final social class in the society is that of the lower or working class consisting of workers in mines, agricultural farms, and factories (Barrow n.d). The three groups can be divided further into their subclasses, but the above are the main social classes found in the British society and are largely recognized as opposed to the sub-classes. In modern times, there have been disparities on the reference of people based on their social classes, as the classes do not appear to matter. In order for the three social classes to be in existence, there must be a form or standard of measurement meant to define the class positions of the people. A number of factors are used to classify people into their various classed and include their level of education, where the higher and better quality of education qualify an individual to be in a higher social class as opposed to those with little education (Haggar 2012). The background of one’s parents is also a factor in determining social class, where aristocracy and amount of wealth that one’s parents own counts following the likelihood of inheritance and being of royal blood. In addition, standards of living are used following the ability of one to afford all basic needs and have the ability to spend or invest the remainder of one’s income on leisure pursuits or worthy investments. Another measuring system is the use of power and influence on society and the social connections that one has, which come in handy in social stratification (Haggar 2012). In the above case, social capital is the main determinant as it all depends on who one is well acquainted with to belong to a given social class as presented by Bourdieu. Social classes have extended their arms into almost every sector in the country including education, jobs, health care and others. As a result, there exists a wide disparity in the level and quality of education, all based on social classes. This is because those in the higher social classes can afford quality education and can further their education to high levels as opposed to those in the lower classes. As such, education faces the wrath of social classes, as affordability is an issue as the gap in education between the rich and poor increases with time and resources (Reay 2006, p.290). Moreover, health care aces disparities on grounds of social classes, as income is a form of measurement in determining social classes. As a result, there are health inequalities due to the affordability of medical services to the point that life expectancy increases, but the social classes remain and the gap in abilities between the groups increasing from time to time. However, those in higher social-economic positions live longer than those in lower classes showing the disparity in social classes, their influence on health care and life expectancy are (Rowlingson 2011, p.8). In conclusion, the UK society is socially divided on many lines based on different sociologists such that there are three main social classes determined by predisposed factors and with significant influence on other fields of life. These include education and health care, as well as life expectancy amongst the UK population. References “Karl Marx and Marxism”. n.d. [Online] Available from: http://www.suu.edu/faculty/ping/pdf/KARLMARXANDMARXISM.pdf [Accessed 9/12/2012] “Three approaches to social capital”. n.d. [Online] Available from: http://www.makingisconnecting.org/gauntlett2011-extract-sc.pdf [Accessed 9/12/2012]. Barrow, M. (n.d). Social Class. Projectbritain.com. Online] Available from: http://resources.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/customs/questions/class.htm#top [Accessed 9/12/2012]. Gane, N. (2005). “Max Weber as Social Theorist: ‘Class, Status, Party”. European Journal of Social Theory 8(2): 211–226> Haggar, R. (2012). Introducing Social Class, the Distribution of Wealth and the Distribution of Income. [Online] Available from: http://www.earlhamsociologypages.co.uk/socclassintro.html [Accessed 9/12/2012]. Milios, J., Dimitri D. and Economakis, G. (2002). Karl Marx and the Classics. [Online] Available from: http://users.ntua.gr/jmilios/Milios-Marx-and-the-classics.pdf [Accessed 9/12/2012] Ozturk, S. (n.d). Pierre Bourdieu’s Theory of Social Action. [Online] Available from: http://www.aku.edu.tr/aku/dosyayonetimi/sosyalbilens/dergi/vi2/sozturk.pdf [Accessed 9/12/2012] Reay, D. (2006). The Zombie Stalking English Schools: Social Class and Educational Inequality. British Journal of Educational Studies Vol.54, No.3, pp 288 –307 Rowlingson, K. (2011). Does Income Inequality Cause Health and Social Problems? [Online] Available from: http://www.jrf.org.uk/sites/files/jrf/inequality-income-social-problems-full.pdf [Accessed 9/12/2012]. Read More