In the context of social theory, class is a group of people having similar characteristics. Marx’s two-class system has a distinct appearance with limited variables (Levine, 2006). In this light, his definition in the political and social realms make it clear for rational interests interested in comparison of one society to another. Evidently, this is different from Weber’s properties that present the pillars of class into four main areas. Certainly, this includes the white-collar workers, properties upper class, manual working class and the petty bourgeoisie. The properties upper class in this regards refers to people with the ability to own or have a political influence over the people in lesser classes.
Weber’s view of life chances is clearly different from Marx’s focus on the same. For example, Weber believes a person’s life position determine the future. As a result, the chances of enjoying a better life depend on high social status. In this regards, the relationship between materials and idealism presents a platform for describing Weber’s view of social stratification. In as much as it appears sensible, Marx does not share the feeling. The far focused capitalist believe oppression and alienation are existing contributors to social stratification. According to him, the standards of relationships are directly tied to division of labour. Despite the differences in opinion, the two share the oppressive nature of social stratification. Both believe material position and standard of living motivate class conflicts experienced in the society. Last but importantly, Marx separated social class from economic possession contrary to Weber, who merges the two explain the fundamental relationships in the society. In essence, Marx and Weber present differences in explaining social class, but also share certain ideas.
Karl Marx’s historical materialism traces to Hegel’s view of