Marxist 'critical theory' exposes the myth of 'value-free' social science. Marxist perspectives draw our attention to the issue of political and economic interests in the mass media and highlight social inequalities in media representations. Marxism helps to situate media texts within the larger social formation. Its focus on the nature of ideology helps us to deconstruct taken-for-granted values. Ideological analysis helps us to expose whose reality we are being offered in a media text.
Society as a whole is more and more splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing each other: Bourgeoisie and Proletariat” (Marx and Engels 1848). Social class, therefore, is based upon economic criteria and conflict occurs between those who own the means of production (bourgeoisie) and the wage-labourers (proletariat). As well as having economic control over the proletariat, the bourgeoisie also have the power to determine the superstructure; the ruling class can distort perceptions of the world and hide the true nature of social relationships and the exploitation of the proletariat and, above all, promote bourgeoisie interests. Marx defines production as workers selling their labour for wages in order to exchange money for commodities that will meet their most basic needs. As Marx
Instead of studying social economics as a whole, other social sciences may study about the distribution of economic goods and how it affects an individual. In other words, a sociologist emphasizes social behavior, but a psychologist will focus more on individual behavior. Karl Marx believed that economics was the underlying key to understanding human society. His idea was that social conflict leads to change in society. Conflict resulted from the struggles of different social classes over the means of production.
According to Marx – in a capitalist society, the economic relationship of exploitation requires ideologies in the superstructure to cover up inequality – they are not innocent/neutral because they justify inequality and serve the interest of powerful groups. Marx argued that the organisation of production in a society shapes the nature of society – refers to this as base/superstructure. The base of the infrastructure is the economy – determines the ideas of society and superstructure – social, cultural, political and ideological parts of society. All history can be divided into five epochs/period; primitive consumerism – everything is shared, in class
They state that the two are always in mortal combat. Capitalists want the maximum profit for the lowest pay and the workers want the highest pay for the least work. On the other hand, although Feminists also believe that society is ruled by a dominant class, they take a much more gender specific outlook and state that society is patriarchal and that men are the dominant gender, creating inequality between men and women. Marxists and Feminists both believe there is exploitation in society. Marxists believe in two defining categories that shape society, the infrastructure and the superstructure.
Karl Marx was a late 19th Century thinker. He saw class as being the central category for analysing social relation and social struggles. This is because he believed that class struggles drive the social changes in our societies ‘The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles’. (Marx, Engels, 1848, pg.8) He viewed class objectively, defining it by the ownership of property. The class struggle’s which Marx refers to above is that of the Bourgeoisie, who own the means of production and the proletariat, who sell their labour.
Postmodernists reject this view of Marxism, that we still live in a two-class society and the claim that education reproduces class inequality. Postmodernist sociologists such as Morrow and Torres see class divisions as no longer important and that society is now much more diverse and fragmented. Marxist approaches are useful in exposing the ‘myth of meritocracy’. They show the role that education plays as an ideological state apparatus, serving the interests of capitalism by reproducing and legitimating class inequality. However, postmodernists criticise Bowles and Gintis’ correspondence principle on the grounds that today’s post-Fordist economy requires schools to produce a very different kind of labour force from the one described by Marxists.
Durkheim sees anomie as responsible for the world’s disorder of economics- the lack of morality and regulation resulted in overpowering the weak; thus, he feels that only norms can prevent the abuse of power and calls for regulation and equal opportunity from birth- the greater the equal opportunity the less need for restraint. Marx looked at how capitalism separated humanity by making work a simple means of individual existence. In addition he describes society in terms of class and economic conflicts. Marx saw proletariat or people of a working class as being underneath the bourgeoisie or the capitalist of a modern society. Marx looked at how alienation of production of commodities by workers also leads to alienation of social life.
An Outline of the Marxist Perspective on the Role of Education in Legitimizing Inequality In this essay I am going to examine the Marxist view that the role of the education system is to reproduce and justify the existing class structure. Marxists see capitalist society as being ruled by the economy. The minority, the ruling class or 'bourgeoisie' rule the majority, namely the workers or 'proletariat'. The bourgeoisie have the wealth and the power to rule. The proletariat is exploited because they are not treated fairly and this is the basis of class inequality During the nineteenth centaury there was much progress and support for the extension of education which was supported by those with a communist view point.
Assess the contribution of Marxism to our understanding of the role of education (20 Marks) In terms of education, Marxists see it based on class division and capitalist exploitation. Marxists see education as functioning to prevent revolution by reproducing class inequality and therefore maintaining capitalism. However this is a very negative view of education. Functionalists see education as a shared culture or value consensus; we perform functions that maintain society as a whole. Importantly functionalists see education based on meritocratic principles which is a big difference to the point of view that Marxists have.