TO WHAT EXTENT IS THE STATE A FORM OF OPPRESSION? The idea that the state is a form of oppression is one that is held my marxists and anarchists, who argue that the state is unnatural, and goes against the potential of having freedom and equality. Marxists view the state as a form of oppression, based on the idea that it’s sole purpose is to uphold the bourgeoise ideology of gaining profit through the capitalist society. Anarchists however see the state as a body which undermines the human rationality to live together in society as harmonious beings. The state assumes that it has power over individuals, which a view blights human freedom as was expressed by Proudhon ‘to be governed is to be inspected by creatures who neither have the right nor virtue to do so’.
Weber does not believe that history had a grand pattern, like Marx does, and although there is a clear relationship between material factors and politics, belies, consciousness; the relationship is complex, multi directional, multi causal and more than that. It is often the case that non material factors, shape or make possible the material relations that Marx uses as a starting point.
The concept of a classless society has been elaborated by Karl Marx, the father of Marxist philosophy which is the basis of the Communist ideology. As a member of a contemporary society under a democracy, my beliefs are rooted on a society made up of different classes. In order to get to a higher class of society, one has to work with sweat, and even blood. This idea has caused many revolutions because some who do not want the present structure of society want it to be restructured to suit the need of every individual. This essay is an attempt to discuss a classless society and to establish whether a classless society is attainable and sustainable in this century.
Marx and Engels used the term "scientific socialism" to describe the type of socialism they saw themselves developing. According to Engels, socialism was not "an accidental discovery of this or that ingenious brain, but the necessary outcome of the struggle between two historically developed classes – the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. Its task was no longer to manufacture a system of society as perfect as possible, but to examine the historical-economic succession of events from which these classes and their antagonism had of necessity sprung, and to discover in the economic conditions thus created the means of ending the conflict." Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels referred to all socialist ideas that were simply a vision and distant goal for society as utopian. Utopian socialists were likened to scientists who drew up elaborate designs and concepts for creating what socialists considered a more equal society.
Assess the strengths and weaknesses of the functionalist approach to society...(33 marks) Functionalism is a macro, consensus theory. They see human behaviour as being influenced by social forces, because it is a macro-scale approach is therefore seen as a strength as it allows functionalist sociologists to observe society, and its institutions, as a whole. Functionalists argue that, individuals are socialised into a shared value which is also known as a value consensus to ensure conformity and social order. However, this functionalists approach is criticised by action theorists, as they argue that individuals create society through their interactions. Marxists may argue that these norms and beliefs are all in interest of the Bourgeoisie and they can prevent or make change by ideological manipulation or force.
This essay aims to construct the notion of ‘popular’ in popular culture through an analysis of the different perspectives of Theodor Adorno and Walter Benjamin on popular culture. Adorno and Benjamin are both members of the Frankfurt School of sociological thought, although Benjamin was only marginally involved. Frankfurt members: “Marxist in general intellectual orientation, but they differ from standard Marxists in de-emphasizing the economic base and its role in determining consciousness and showing how ideology and culture can have a causal, and a shaping role.” They are the main source of the Critical Theory, which criticized capitalism based on their experiences of being forced by the totalitarian fascist party to leave their homes, and the abusive misuse of popular culture as propaganda. An example is the film “The triumph of the Will” which promoted Nazi ideology. Critical theory was based on the idea that people should pursue greater autonomy and self-definition, through the knowledge that steps beyond the obstacles and mystification that prevent individuals to accurately perceive their situation and reality.
How and why the world really works and should work. Some conceptions of ideology see ideology as the structure of assumptions which are a representation of the imaginary relation of individuals to the real condition of existence. Ideology creates us as persons, it gives us a sense of being, an existence if you will. Through Ideology people accept or reject the current way of doing things, they understanding or explain what is natural or is perceived as, and accept their role in society. Ideology brings about socialization or is a partner in crime with, and brings about the process of shaping our cognitive and emotional interpretations in our social world.
It focuses on how people come together to create society. It focuses on whether actions are good for the equilibrium of society, these are called functions. It also focuses on things that undermine the equilibrium, these are called dysfunctions. For example functionalist Conflict theory do not see society as whole coming together well for one purpose. It focuses on class conflict.
Browne once said "sociological perspectives centre on how much freedom or control the individual had to influence society" He goes on to comment on the two main approaches "structuralism is concerned with the overall structure of society and the way social institutions act as a constraint, or limit and control individual behaviour". Structuralism offers a view of the individual being controlled by the society they live in, Marx and Durkheim are similar in that they can both be described as structuralists, however their individual ideas are somewhat different. Functionalism was developed by Emile Durkheim, he believed like Comte that sociology should be viewed as a precise science and that society should be studied objectively. Durkheim placed an enormous amount of emphasis on social facts which he saw as ways of acting, thinking or feeling that are external to individuals and have their own reality outside the lives and perceptions of individual people. This is known as the macro approach, which places a great emphasis on the structure of society and how an individual operates with that society.
However Marxists would argue that social problems such as underachievement are simply aspects of a wider structure of class inequality, and unlike functionalists, they do not see the state and its policies beneficial to all members of society. In Marxists view, the state represents the ruling class, and social policies serve the interests of capitalism as opposed to society as a whole. For example Marxists would state that social policies, such as the NHS, maintain the labour force for further exploitation. From a social democratic approach, sociologists, such as Townsend, believe that sociologist