Throughout history there have been bourgeois and proletarians, in ancient Rome patricians, knights, plebeians and slaves (57). Marx argues that “the immediate aim of the Communists is the same as that of all other proletarian parties: formation of the proletariat into a class, overthrow of the bourgeois supremacy, conquest of political power by the proletariat" (67). He also considers the changes that by wanting to abolish private property, the Communist are seen as destroying the "ground work of all personal freedom, activity, and independence" (63). However, he explains how a laborer, proletarian, doesn’t properly own any property creating capitalism, a property which works in favor for the exploitation of the worker. Marx
This essay will look at that two structural theories of functionalism and Marxists, it will compare and contrast both perspectives and identify similarities and differences in their views of on education family, as well as highlighting the strengths and a weaknesses in both perspectives. Sociological Theory Map (Dierkes', 2010) Emile Durkheim, the French sociologist was one of the founding functionalists. Believed sociology should be studied scientifically methods, just as scientists study the natural world. His famous first principle of sociology was “study social fact as things!” This form of study is known as positivism. The functionalist draws an analogy between the function of society and the function of the human body.
These combine to form the infrastructure and the superstructure i.e. education, politics, norms and values all support the dominant system determined by economic factors” Haralambos, M & Holborn, M (2000) Marxism believed that there was class conflict between the bourgeoisies (upper class/owners of land, factories etc) and the Proletariat (the working class/middle class). The Marxism theory was also a macro sociological theory as it views society in the ‘bigger picture’. The functionalist theory is different in the way that it is a consensus theory; this means that everything in society functions as individual parts that as a whole create society. Functionalists look at society like the human body; both human parts and parts of society have certain needs that need to be met if they are to survive.
Our behaviour is controlled by the rules of society into which we are born; the result is we don’t have to be told that what we are doing is socially unacceptable- we already know and feel uncomfortable if we don’t conform to social norms. He wrote about American society (1951) and argued that the family had two basic functions: * Primary socialisation of children. * Stabilisation of adult personalities. The main criticism of functionalism as an approach is that I does not address areas of conflict (which are found in all societies) and paints a rosy picture of institutions, implying that organisations always run smoothly and co-operate well with each other. Some groups have more wealth and power than others and may impose their views on less powerful groups Marxism- Marxism is the theory that society is in a constant state of conflict between the rich and poor, society uses a system called capitalism to keep
"The Hunger Games" by Suzanne Collins portrays a futuristic society set in a post-apocalyptic world; the novel exemplifies the perversion of Karl Marx's theory known as Marxism and the struggles between social classses. Collins shows the various ways in which a communistic society can be corrupted. It is human nature, to be greedy, selfish, lazy, and decietful; this is what ultimately forces Marxism to be an impossibility. A communistic based society would have no need for government simply because each individual would be more than willing to live their life according to the laws and ideas of Marxism. There would be a much greater chance of success for communism, if the location/environment was smaller and consisted solely of those in complete non-forceful compliance.
How this will be accomplished will be by comparing and contrasting their assumptions. Then I will state my opinion on which of the two better fits my personal sociological views. Functionalism and the conflict theory are sociological perspectives that present different assertions of studying the society and how the resultant perspectives of the society are enhanced. The functionalist perspective perceives the society as a system and on a large scale. The functionalist perspective presents social moulding of an individual rather than use of force to the individual in order to carry out societal roles.
He argues that without social solidarity, social life would be impossible as everyone would pursue their own selfish desires and not work together to get what they want out of life. The education system helps to create this social solidarity by transmitting society's ideas from one generation to the next. For example, Durkheim argues that teaching of a countries history instil a sense of a shared heritage and commitment to the wider social group. However Marxists argue this social solidarity is just brainwashing students into thinking that everyone in society today is equal and that we are all part of society, while we are really just getting exploited by the bourgeoisie. People are just being led into a sense of false class consciousness and are being persuaded into thinking they have the same values of everyone else when they actually haven't.
The transition from the old Russia to a truly communist state would require industrialization on a massive scale. According to Marxist theory, only through a modern industrialized economy could a true proletariat class be developed as Marx makes no mention of a peasant class. Marxist theory aside, the need to industrialize was also a pragmatic matter of self-defense. Stalin, either as a result of paranoia or a simple distrust of the capitalist West, assumed his country would have to fight for its survival. He presented the need to industrialize as a life or death struggle.
Origins One evident inconsistency with communism and consecration is the source of ideas. Karl Marx was raised with a belief that “man’s innate goodness and reason was blocked only by social, political and religious barriers, and other artificially created rules” (Miller et al. 18). From his schooling at the University of Berlin to his family life, he continually pushed for his ideas. He wanted to establish a “dictatorship of the proletariat,” which means that the working class majority would rise to power over capitalist minority.
Using material from item B and elsewhere assess the usefulness of Marxist approaches in explaining crime Marxism is a conflict theory established by Karl Marx. Marxists believe that the capitalist system is just a way in which the ruling classes (the bourgeoisie) control and exploit the workers (the proletariat), and it focuses on the unequal conflict between these two sectors of society. Marxists believe that the capitalist system is criminogenic – which means that by its nature it inevitably causes crime. As item B states, Marxists see crime in the capitalist system as ‘a tool of the ruling class’ where they can control the working class and crime is an unavoidable result because of the oppression the working class are subject to. They also believe that laws are enforced mostly to benefit the interests of the ruling class.