Introducing Marxism – A More Detailed Version – Earlham Sociology and Politics Pages

Introducing Marxism - A More Detailed Version

My aim in this document is to introduce some of the main ideas of Marxist theory to students beginning their Advanced Level studies of Sociology and/or Government and Politics. Elsewhere on the site students can find more detailed information on Marxist theories; on the application of Marxist theories in the Sociology of the Family, Education Systems, Social Stratification and the analysis of the State; and on comparisons between Marxism and other form of Socialism.

Useful Links

Click here and here for introductory videos on Marx and Marxism: an ideal starting point. June 2015 and March 2017

Click here for an excellent podcast by Dr. Pete Woodcock [University of Huddersfield] on Karl Marx

Click here for a very useful Screen Cast by Steve Bassett of Park College Sociology Department

Also if you require only the briefest of summaries of Marxist ideas you could click here for my 12 point summary of this document!

Click here for In Our Time on Marx

Click here for podcast on Charles Umney's new book: Class Matters: Inequality and Exploitation in 21st Century Britain

Click here and here for articles on Karl Marx from The Conversation and here for an article on Friedrich Engels from The Conversation New links added May 2018

Click here for an audio discussion from Thinking Allowed between Professor Laurie Taylor and Professor David Harvey on the current relevance of Marxism. February 2018

Click here for Gramsci and Neo-Marxism [Not the ideal place to start though!]

Click here for a series of audio lectures with slides on Antonio Gramsci presented by Professor Bob Jessop.

Click here for some discussion of other aspects of Neo-Marxism

Click here for The Frankfurt School [From In Our Time : 2010]

Click here and here for podcasts [11-18 minutes ] By Prof. David Harvey on The Contradictions of Capitalism NEW links added October 2017 [Via these links you can find longer, more detailed discussions and lectures by Professor David Harvey

Click here for Stephanie Flanders' documentary on Marxism via You Tube. It's back...hopefully for good. Sorry ..It's been withdrawn again! It's back again as of August 2017!

Click here for an introduction to Marxism and the Ruling Class Ideology

Click here for an Assignment on Marxism and Capitalism

Click here for Marxism and Contemporary Society

Click here for a PowerPoint: Introducing Marxist Theories of the State

Click here for a YouTube clip of Charlie Chaplin in Modern Times which illustrates the possibility of Alienation under capitalism. This link may break from time to time but it is operative at present. May 22nd 2018.

New Link added October 2013 . Click here for Guardian article: Why Marxism is on the rise again

New Link added September 2017. Click here for video lecture by Professor David Harvey on The Contradictions of Capitalism,

Click here for the website of Erik Olin Wright and here for a recent article by Erik Olin Wright . Via these links you will find some of Erik Olin Wright's detailed contributions to the development of Neo-Marxist scholarship. Erik Olin Wright passed away in January 2019. [R.I.P.]. [Advanced Level Sociology students approaching the study of Marxism for the first time should begin with more introductory explanations of Marxist theories before consideration of Professor Wright's work which is, however, mentioned explicitly in the Stratification and Differentiation option within the AQA syllabus although for examination purposes students should concentrate on Professor Wright's models of the capitalist class structure which are mentioned in the main textbooks. You may also click here for a little information on these models.] You could click here for a Lecture by Erik Olin Wright on the combination of Marxist ,Weberian and Durkheimian theories of social class... it is quite complicated but brilliant!

Introduction
Click here for an Assignment on Marxism and Capitalism

Karl Marx [1818 - 1883 ] emphasised in his theories that if human beings are to survive it is obviously necessary for them to produce the goods and services necessary for their survival. This led him to develop long term historical theories of social change in which he focussed especially on the economic characteristics of successive historical epochs which described as Modes of Production, distinguishing between the Primitive Communist, the Ancient, the Feudal and the Capitalist Modes of Production. He then provided detailed analyses of the transitions between these modes of production and developed theories to explain how the future final transition from the Capitalist to the Socialist [and ultimately Communist ]Mode of Production would occur. In this document I concentrate on Marx' analysis of the Capitalist Mode of Production and on the predicted transition to the Socialist Mode of Production.

Karl Marx[1818-1883] and Friedrich Engels claimed in The Communist Manifesto [1848] that "The history of all hitherto society is the history of class struggles" and they certainly believed this to be the case in capitalist societies. These capitalist societies had promoted massive economic growth and modernisation but they were also riven by economic contradictions which would lead ultimately to their demise. Marx recognised that C19th capitalist class structures were complex and in his historical studies referred variously to landowners , industrialists [the Bourgeoisie] , the working class [the Proletariat] , the peasantry, the Lumpenproletariat and to a wide range of intermediate strata but he also argued in his best known work that capitalist societies would eventually polarise into two major social classes : the property owning Bourgeoisie and the property-less Proletariat which would eventually absorb the above mentioned classes. {However in some of his later work he also recognised that the growth of the joint stock company and the increased technical complexity of production techniques and managerial methods would lead to the growth of the intermediate strata but he did not, unfortunately integrate this insight into his general theories of social change.]

Karl Marx [1818- 1883] was born in Trier, studied at the universities of Bonn and Berlin and then pursued his political activities in Paris, Brussels, Cologne and London where he lived from 1849 to 1883. Among his major theoretical works were the Economic and Political Manuscripts [written in 1844 but unpublished until 1932], the German Ideology [1846], the Communist Manifesto written with assistance from his lifelong colleague Friedrich Engels 1848] , A Contribution to the critique of Political Economy [1859] and Volume One of Capital [1867]. When Marx died in 1883 Friedrich Engels took it upon himself to collate various items [some unfinished] which Marx had left behind and these were published as Capital Volume2 [1885] and Capital Volume 3 [1894] which should therefore be seen as primarily the work of Karl Marx but with a substantial input from Friedrich Engels.

It is important to note at the outset that Karl Marx was influenced considerably by the ideas of the philosopher GWF Hegel although he would soon come to dispute the validity of some of Hegel’s fundamental ideas. Hegel’s ideas are very complex, and I provide only a simplified summary of his ideas here,

Hegel developed a theory of history in which the historical process involves the gradual development of the full potential of the human spirit whereby human beings gradually come to realise that they have the capacity for freedom.

Hegel had a progressive, optimistic view of the historical process and of humanity’s capacities for self- development. He was a supporter of the Enlightenment and the early stages of the French Revolution and subsequently came to believe that the institutions of what he considered to be the modern, rational Prussian State of the late C18th and early C19th would resolve any remaining social conflicts in the interests of all. However, his optimistic view of the Prussian State has not been shared by his Young Hegelian critics [including the young Marx] who argued that the Hegelian method should also be used to generate an antithesis to the current Prussian State followed by a synthesis resulting in further liberal reform of the Prussian State which the Young Hegelians regarded as overly authoritarian.

[ It would not be long before Marx would break with the Young Hegelians primarily because Marx was critical of the Young Hegelians decisions to continue to concentrate on philosophical theorising and their unwillingness to involve themselves in radical politics. Students wishing to study Marx’s connections with the Young Hegelians and especially with Bruno Bauer and Ludwig Feuerbach could usefully consult David McLellan‘s detailed study Karl Marx: His Life and Thought . However, I shall not pursue these details here]

Hegel argued that the development of philosophical thought occurs via the ongoing resolution of philosophical conflicts in a process which was characterised as Dialectical Idealism. In outline Individual A might propound a particular idea [A thesis] which is contradicted by Individual B who propounds a contradictory idea [an antithesis]. Following discussion, their disagreement can be resolved via a synthesis of their contradictory ideas, but this resolution will only be partial and will be followed by further stages of thesis, anthesis and synthesis

Hegel argued also that different social groups in society will also hold conflicting ideas. Thus, very importantly, there are conflicting ideas about freedom as between masters and slaves, lords and serfs and employers and employees about the nature of freedom.

Hegel believed that human history has involved a dialectical conflict between various social groups which will eventually enable all human beings to be free at which point he purpose of the Spirit of History will have been achieved and the human spirit will have reached its full potential. It is vital to note that it is an ongoing conflict between ideas which has brought about freedom which is why Hegel’s method is described as the method of dialectical idealism.

The Early Marx

In July-August of 1844 Marx wrote the Economic and political Manuscripts [not fully published until 1932] which included an analysis of what he considered to be the nature of alienation under capitalism and a prediction of the likely nature of a future communist society which he believed would develop into a utopian society in which all citizens would be able to develop their potential to the full. Of course, as we now know the nature of the then USSR society which did develop following the Russian Revolution of 1917 was dictatorial and repressive and differed in every respect from Marx’ utopian vision. However especially in the 1960s, these views of the Young Marx on alienation under capitalism and the nature of a future communist society combined to encourage support from the New Left of the time for socialist change.

Marx and Historical Materialism

However, Marx also involved himself increasingly with the critique of the Hegelian philosophy of history. The Hegelian system saw progress as deriving from the conflict of ideas and while Marx initially sympathised with the Hegelian explanation of conflict, he soon came to argue that in fact ideas themselves did not arise out of pure rational thought but were dependent upon the material factors which brought them into existence. Thus, for example the ideas of upper- and working-class people would differ because of the differing class backgrounds of the individuals concerned. Consequently, Marx saw himself as a materialist rather than an idealist and has been described as a dialectical materialist although he did not in fact use the term himself. Marx’ materialism heavily influenced the theory of history which he developed in that whereas for Hegel, the historical process involved the clash of competing ideas in the thesis, antithesis, synthesis, framework, for Marx the historical process derived from economic factors involving inconsistency between the forces of production and the relations of production and various forms of class conflict and struggle.

Interpretations of Marx’s work differ in the degree of emphasis which is given to the importance of economic factors in shaping the nature of capitalist societies and influencing the processes of revolutionary change.

It has been pointed out that, apart from the Communist Manifesto, Marx’ own writings were not widely available during his lifetime and that it was Engels who was mainly responsible for the dissemination of Marx’ ideas after his death.

Some analysts have argued that Engels tended to overstate the scientificity of Marx’ theory of historical materialism which should more accurately be regarded as a philosophy of history rather than a scientific theory. It has also been argued that Engels tended to overemphasise the role of economic factors in Marx’ theories and Engels himself accepted that this had occurred because he and Marx wished to emphasise the role of economic factors in in comparison with alternative theories which had understated the importance of economic factors.

In the most economic determinist interpretations [which were especially dominant in the era of the Second International ] it is argued that the economic base of capitalist societies heavily influences the organisation of the institutions of the superstructure which function to ensure the continuing existence of the capitalist system and the continuing dominance of the capitalist class and that socialist revolutions can occur only when economic circumstances are conducive to their success : i.e. when the contradictions between the forces of production and the relations of production make socialist revolution inevitable.

This may be taken also to suggest that individuals, social classes and political parties can do little to accelerate the socialist revolution, which can occur only when the appropriate economic circumstances are in place. To believe otherwise is to believe in excessive voluntarism which assigns an imagined freedom of action to individuals and social groups which they do not in reality possess and to recommend political strategies which are doomed to failure because currently existing economic conditions are not conducive to their success.

It is clear , however, that other important elements of Marxist theory militate against this economic determinist interpretation of Marxism as , for example, in Marx and Engels statement in The Communist Manifesto that “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles” and in Marx’ statement in The 18th Brumaire of Louis Napoleon [1852] that “Men make their own history but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances but under circumstances existing already given and transmitted from the past” .Each of these statements indicate clearly that Marx believed that individual will and action could also influence the course of history even though economic circumstances do to some extent constrain the scope for individual revolutionary activity.

Marx outlined his theory of Historical Materialism with the collaboration of Engels [and some other authors] both in the German Ideology [which was written in 1845-46 but not published until 1932] and again in h Critique of Political Economy [1859]. In this latter work, Marx recognises that the connections between the forces of production and the relations of production are very complex and he uses words such “corresponds to” or “ conditions” rather than “determines” to describe this connection.

In Marx’s theory of historical materialism, it is essential to distinguish between the following concepts

The Mode of Production which refers to the overall organisation of society. Marx distinguished between the following Modes of Production: : Primitive Communism, Ancient Society, Feudalism, Capitalism, Socialism and Communism.

The Means of Production: the land, factories and other buildings, machinery and raw materials which are owned by the Bourgeoisie and used in the process of production of goods and services. [(In The Communist Manifesto Marx and Engels point out that the Bourgeoisie actually own the Means of Production and of Exchange which means that they also own the banks, large shops and other commercial undertakings.}

The Forces of Production include all of the elements which are used in the production of goods and services: land, raw materials, machinery and labour. The quantity and quality of the forces of production in each mode of production are very dependent upon the levels of scientific and technological knowledge which vary significantly as between different modes of production. Click here for an item on the forces of production from Sociologymag.

The Social Relations of Production: the relationships between dominant and subservient groups in society: e.g. in the capitalist Mode of Production the relationships between the Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat.

Since the most fundamental human necessity is the production of the goods and services necessary for physical survival, the key features of all societies derive from the system of production which is used in each society.

Therefore, all societies are to be analysed as Modes of Production in which the Forces of Production, the Means of Production and the Relations of Production Interact in differing ways.

Marx distinguished between different types of societies based upon differences in their modes of production: tribal societies, ancient societies, feudal societies and capitalist societies. Marx stated that whereas in tribal societies, property in Marx’ terminology] was owned in common, in ancient societies, feudal societies and capitalist societies, property was privately owned by slave owners [ancient society], the landed nobility [feudal society] and the bourgeoisie [capitalist society] which in each type of society case enabled the property owners to exploit the property-less slaves, peasantry and proletariat [the working class] respectively.

Thus, the social relations of production involved inequality of ownership of the means of production, the exploitation by the owners of the means of production of the non-owners of the means of production and the inevitable conflict between the owners and non-owners of the means of production.

Click here for a very useful extract from A Critique of Political Economy in which Marx outlines the key elements of the theory of Historical Materialism. I repeat parts of this extract below.

In the social production of their existence, men inevitably enter into definite relations, which are independent of their will, namely relations of production appropriate to a given stage in the development of their material forces of production. The totality of these relations of production constitutes the economic structure of society, the real foundation, on which arises a legal and political superstructure and to which correspond definite forms of social consciousness” This statement illustrates Marx’ Economic Base- Superstructure model in which the economic base heavily influences the institutions of the superstructure of society.

The mode of production of material life conditions the general process of social, political and intellectual life. It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness. This statement illustrates that contrary to Hegel’s view Marx believes that Ideas do not have their own independent existence but are heavily influenced by the overall organisation of society

At a certain stage of development, the material productive forces of society come into conflict with the existing relations of production or – this merely expresses the same thing in legal terms – with the property relations within the framework of which they have operated hitherto. From forms of development of the productive forces these relations turn into their fetters. Then begins an era of social revolution. The changes in the economic foundation lead sooner or later to the transformation of the whole immense superstructure. Here is Marx’ theory of social change as deriving from incompatibility between the forces of production and the social relations of production. view

Furthermore, Marx states that “The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e. the class, which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force. The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the means of mental production, so that thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the means of mental production are subject to it. The ruling ideas are nothing more than the ideal expression of the dominant material relationships, the dominant material relationships grasped as ideas.” This statement indicates that Marx rejects Hegel’s idealist view that ideas exist independently of the social organisation of the society in which the ideals arise

In Marxist Theory it is essential to distinguish between the following concepts:

C19th Century capitalism was characterised by mass economic inequality and dreadful working and living conditions for members of the property-less proletariat or working class and the concentration of economic and political power in the hands of the property owning Bourgeoisie who were also a politically dominant ruling class whose domination was sustained by the operation of the institutions of the superstructure of societies [ religious organisations, the family , the schools and the mass media and ultimately the police and the military. Meanwhile the State, far from being a guardian of the national interest [whatever this means ] was in fact a "committee for managing the common affairs of the Bourgeoisie."

Class conflict between the Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat was endemic and inevitable since it derived from the economic exploitation of the Proletariat by the Bourgeoisie and it would eventually intensify due to the contradictions of capitalism which would result in the immiserisation of the Proletariat leading to the growth of revolutionary working class consciousness and the revolutionary overthrow of the capitalist system. Capitalism would then be replaced gradually by a classless communist utopia in which the State would gradually wither away. Thus in the Marxist theory the capitalist system determined the class structure and the contradictions of capitalist would strengthen working class consciousness and result in revolutionary class action

Marx predicted that anti-capitalist revolutions were most likely to occur in the countries of advanced capitalism such as Germany, France and the UK but for a variety of reasons discussed later in this document and elsewhere on this site such revolutions did not occur. Click here for further information on Marxist theory and for the neo-Marxist theories of Antonio Gramsci

Marx' ideas did provide much of the theoretical backing for the revolutionary movements which seized power in Russia, China, Cuba and elsewhere. These revolutions did not usher in the kind of socialist, egalitarian societies that Marx hoped for, but instead, power came to be monopolised by the leaders of Communist Parties of these countries. The workers were still exploited and although living standards did improve, this was not sufficient to prevent the collapse of Communism in the U.S.S.R. and Eastern Europe in the late 1980s while although the Chinese Communist party remains in power the Chinese economy works primarily on capitalist principles.. It is important to note, however, that these regimes were not strictly speaking, Communist regimes because the level of economic and political equality implied by Communism was certainly absent.

The Marxist Analysis of Capitalism and of the Transition to Socialism.

The Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat

Marx argued that a process of class polarisation would mean that capitalist societies would come to be divided into two major social classes -- the Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat. The Bourgeoisie own almost all of the land, banks, factories and raw materials . [which in Marxist terminology are described as the means of production ] whereas the Proletariat own little or no property and work for wages . In his historical studies Marx noted that other social classes existed but t in Marx's best-known theory, it is suggested that a process of class polarisation will occur whereby the members of intermediate classes will eventually be incorporated into one or other of the two main social classes: i.e. the size of the intermediate or middle classes will decline. (However in his later work, he predicted that the size of the middle classes would increase and modern Marxists have analysed the nature of this growing middle class in considerable detail.)

The Social Relations of Production between the two main classes inevitably involve exploitation and conflict. The Proletariat (the working class) are poorly paid, work long hours in dangerous conditions, are poorly housed, poorly educated and in bad health. They are also unrepresented politically. Trade unions are weak or non-existent; no political party represents the interests of working class people who in case have no voting rights. Meanwhile the Bourgeoisie (the upper class ) exploit the Proletariat. They earn high profits and enjoy a privileged life style at the expense of the Proletariat who earn low wages exactly because the Bourgeoisie earn high profits. That is: workers are exploited in the sense that they receive in wages less than the value of the output of goods and services which they produce and this exploitation of the workers contributes directly to the profits received by the Bourgeoisie.

According to Marx individuals are naturally creative beings with the capacity for self-fulfilment in their work which would in ideal circumstances provide opportunities for individual creativity and work satisfaction as workers recognise that they are producing goods and services which meet real human needs. However although Marx recognised that the development of capitalism led to technological improvement with the potential for fuller human self-development the actual organisation of capitalism has inhibited the liberating potential of improved technology.

Instead , according to Marx, under capitalism the members of the proletariat ,far from experiencing self-fulfilment in their work, actually experience various kinds of alienation or estrangement from the products that they produce, from the productive process, from their own "species being" [that is from their own creative nature] and from other workers.

Under capitalism it is the capitalists, motivated by the desire for profit rather than the desire to meet real human needs who decide which goods and services will be produced and the prices at which they will be sold. The workers must accept that it is the capitalists rather than themselves who determine the ultimate purpose of production : i.e. profit so that the workers are said to be alienated from the goods and services which they have actually produced. [It must be recognised that in many cases goods produced for profit do also meet real human need but that in other cases it is the creation of false needs via advertising which help to generate profit.]
Under capitalism workers have little or no overall control over the production process which is often based upon the division of labour involving the breaking down of the production process into a series of simple repetitive and boring tasks which give no opportunity for worker creativity. It has been said that under conditions of modern capitalism many workers exercise more skill driving to work [if they can afford a car] than in their daily work while in Marx's analysis of C19th capitalism work becomes a means to an end [earning the money necessary to survive] rather than an end in itself and "as soon as there is no physical or other compulsion men flee from labour like the plague."
Under capitalism because workers have no control over the ultimate purpose of production, the destination of the goods and services they produce and the organisation of actual production processes they are said to be alienated from their own species being: that is they are denied the opportunity to fulfil themselves in creative, socially useful work.
They are alienated also from other people in capitalist society. The capitalists perceive their workers not as individuals with a wide range of interesting and positive human characteristics but merely as sources of labour power to be exploited in the pursuit of profit while in the wider society workers are defined in terms of their occupation rather than they own individuality and workers will usually see other workers as competitors for scarce employment rather than as collaborators in a socially useful production process. And even capitalists may themselves experience alienation as they sometimes recognise that the production processes which they own and control is , in several respects destructive of human happiness and welfare.
Nevertheless according to Marx workers will gradually recognise the sources of their own exploitation and collaborate in the abolition of capitalism which will result also in the abolition of alienation. Of course there is little evidence that worker alienation ended in the factories of the former USSR but Marx if alive, would have denied that the USSR was a communist society.
It has been argued that under conditions of advanced capitalism there are greater opportunities for worker satisfaction especially for skilled manual workers in high technology industries which require workers to use considerable individual autonomy and judgement although others have argued that these trends have been overstated. Students wishing to pursue these arguments could begin by consulting the theories of Robert Blauner and Harry Braverman.
The concept of alienation might also be applied to other aspects of society: students might feel alienated at school; individuals might feel alienated from a political process which denies them real political influence; from remote private and public sector bureaucracies and from the sometimes less than stimulating products of the "entertainment" industries. There is a lot to think about here!

In summary we can show the relationship between the Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat as follows:

The Economic Base [or Infrastructure] and the Superstructure

Marx also believed that the economic organisation of capitalist societies would heavily influence other characteristics of these societies. In Marx's terms, the Economic Base [or infrastructure] of capitalist societies would heavily influence the Superstructure of these societies. The organisations of the Superstructure include the political and legal systems, the police and armed forces, "the" family ,the educational system, the mass media and the church. Within the Superstructure perhaps the most significant institutions are the institutions of the state: these include Heads of State [Presidents or Monarchs], central governments and their bureaucracies, legislatures, judiciaries and the organisations of regional, state and or local government, the armed forces and the police .

Under the conditions of C19th capitalism Marx argued that the economic base influenced the superstructure of society in the following ways.

The Bourgeoisie were the economically dominant class but were also a politically dominant Ruling Class which controlled the institutions of the state because all of the political leaders were drawn from the Bourgeoisie and could be relied upon to represent the interests of their own class.
Meanwhile, as already mentioned, the Proletariat were unrepresented politically.
The legal system protected private property and heavy penalties were imposed for minor thefts, with no account taken of mitigating circumstances. The legal system also discriminated against trade unions.
The Ruling Class attempted to maintain its power by spreading a so-called Ruling Class Ideology via the Family, the Church, the Schools and the Media, designed to encourage the working class to accept their own exploitation and the dominance of the Ruling Class without question.
Therefore, education was mainly for the rich and any education given to the poor was designed to keep them firmly in their place. According to Marx, religion played a similar role. The net effect was that the proletariat were beset by false class consciousness which meant that they were unaware of the real sources of their exploitation.
If it should prove necessary the Bourgeoisie would be able to rely upon the police and the armed forces to sustain its power and it has occasionally done so although under normal circumstances ideological manipulation has proved sufficient to maintain its dominance.
It is very important to note that Marxists argue that although modern capitalist societies have elections based upon universal adult suffrage, socialist or social democratic political parties, trade unions and a plethora of other pressure groups the Bourgeoisie still exercises decisive power over the state: according to Marxists the Bourgeoisie remains tan economically dominant class and a politically dominant ruling class.

Marx and the Transition from Capitalism to Socialism
Marx’s general theory of social change is outlined in the following long quotation.

At a certain stage of development, the material productive forces of society come into conflict with the existing relations of production or – this merely expresses the same thing in legal terms – with the property relations within the framework of which they have operated hitherto. From forms of development of the productive forces these relations turn into their fetters. Then begins an era of social revolution. The changes in the economic foundation lead sooner or later to the transformation of the whole immense superstructure. [Karl Marx: A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy 1859]

Marx recognised that the operation of capitalist system had led to vast improvements in technology which resulted in huge increases in output which potentially could improve living standards for all. However he believed also that capitalism resulted in the exploitation of the proletariat and that the capitalist system was unstable and contained within itself the seeds of its own downfall. Thus increasingly the capitalist system would be unable to make the best use of the ever improving level of technology and a conflict between the social relations of production [ the ownership of the means of production] and the forces of production[ the level of technology] would lead to the disintegration of the capitalist system.

Although capitalism would improve living standards for some, it would also lead to increasing unemployment, poverty and misery for many. This was Marx's theory of the immiseration or pauperisation of the Proletariat.

Industrialisation would lead to urbanisation and this would make it easier to organise trade unions and political parties to represent the interests of the working class.

There would be a polarisation of classes as members of the intermediate classes either fell into the proletariat or rose into the bourgeoisie although later in life Marx argued that it was possible that the size of the intermediate classes would increase.

Gradually the Proletariat would eventually become aware of the reasons for its exploitation. It would develop a consciousness of its class position. That is, in Marx's own terms, it would change from a class in itself to a class for itself. It would protest, demonstrate and finally rise up in revolution and overthrow the Bourgeoisie. Capitalism would eventually be replaced by Communism which was to be a classless utopia.

Marx tended to argue that the transition to socialism was most likely to occur in societies where the capitalist system was most fully developed as in Western Europe and he also argued that if and when these relatively advanced capitalist countries adopted universal suffrage socialism could possibly be introduced by parliamentary rather revolutionary means. There have subsequently been ongoing debates among Marxists around the possibility or otherwise of achieving Socialism via parliamentary methods

Also in later life Marx recognised the possibility of a transition to socialism in Russia despite the fact that capitalism was relatively underdeveloped there. Marx's theories were adapted significantly by Lenin who argued that in Russia a small tightly organised political party would be able to accelerate the revolutionary process despite the relative under-development of Russian capitalism.

Revolutions inspired to a considerable extent by Marxism occurred also in China , Vietnam and elsewhere in the "Third World" although in each case capitalism was relatively underdeveloped in these societies.

Unfortunately the so-called Socialist or Communist regimes introduced in the former USSR , China and elsewhere were to a great extent founded upon repressive dictatorship and did not conform remotely to the kind of classless, liberating communism that Marx had in mind.

Criticisms of the Marxist Theory

The Marxist theory has been heavily criticised but has also been defended resolutely by contemporary Marxists. Here are some of the main criticisms.

Marx’ Overall Theory of Revolution

Marx suggested that socialist revolutions were more likely to occur in advanced capitalist societies but in the event such revolutions occurred in societies such as Russia and China where capitalism was not fully developed. However, Marx did also suggest later in life that socialist revolution might be possible in Russia well before capitalism was fully developed.

The Limitations of Marx' theories of Social Class

It has been argued that Marx's theory of social classes is inadequate in that he is said to have concentrated too much on the Proletariat and the Bourgeoisie and failed to predict the growth of the middle class although, as already mentioned he did predict this in his later theories..
Critics also argued that Marx underestimated the importance of non-class differences in societies. Gender and ethnic differences may be given inadequate coverage in Marxist theory.
It is also claimed that Marx underestimated the importance of divisions within the main social classes----for example the importance of the divisions between skilled, semi-skilled and unskilled working class people that might reduce their class solidarity and, there fore, reduce the likelihood of revolution.
The German sociologist Max Weber (1864-1920) several important criticisms of Marx' class theories .

a. A person's class position depended not only on ownership or non-ownership of wealth but also on their incomes, fringe benefits and opportunities for social mobility. These variables, combined together, described an individual's Market Situation.

b. Capitalist societies could be divided into 4 main social classes: the propertied upper class, the property-less white collar workers, the petty Bourgeoisie and the manual working class.

c. Divisions within these social classes were more important than Marx thought. Such divisions might mean that the working class would never unite and that, as a result, anti-capitalist revolutions simply would not occur.

d. Divisions within classes might occur as a result of divisions of status within these classes. While class, as we have seen, is basically an economic concept, status refers to one's standing or prestige in society. It might be, sadly, that black people have less status than white people in the UK, or that Catholics have less status than Protestants in N. Ireland and these status differences may restrict the unity of the working class.

5.Marx' class theories have been criticised also from Functionalist and Postmodernism perspectives

The Excessive Economic Determinism of Marxist Theories

Critics have argued that Marx overstated the extent to which the organisation of the economic base determined the organisation of the superstructure. They argued that Marx had incorrectly assumed that the capitalist economic system determined how families, education systems, the mass media ,churches and states would operate under capitalism. However Marx did seek to distance himself from extreme forms of economic determinism and neo-Marxists such as Gramsci have certainly argued that the organisations of the superstructure may well act with considerable relative autonomy visa vis the economic base and that it is perfectly possible that the organisation of the superstructure will influence the organisation of the economic base while also admitting the possibility that the economic base will influence the superstructure.

The Limitations of the Marxist Theory of the State

Marxists argue that although modern capitalist societies have elections based upon universal adult suffrage, socialist or social democratic political parties, trade unions and a plethora of other pressure groups the Bourgeoisie still exercises decisive power over the state: according to Marxists the Bourgeoisie remains an economically dominant class and a politically dominant ruling class. However other theorists have argued that power in modern capitalist societies can be better explained in terms of models of classical pluralism or elite pluralism. Nevertheless Marxists reject these theories and continue to support the view that the Bourgeoisie is still a ruling class.

The Inaccuracy of the Marxist Analysis of Capitalism and of Marxist Theories of Revolution

According to his critics the Marxist analysis is fundamentally flawed and has become increasingly inaccurate during the C20th as capitalism changed in ways not predicted by Marx. According to their supporters the political ideologies of Liberalism, Conservatism and Social Democracy offered much more accurate depictions of the capitalism system. in the advanced capitalist economies of Western Europe. Consequently the revolutions predicted by Marx to occur in the advanced capitalist societies of Western Europe simply did not occur.

a. They did not occur because the living standards of most working class people improved very much in the 20th Century.

b. Also, Welfare States developed in capitalist societies which have, for example resulted in better health care and education for working class people and more or less eliminated absolute poverty.

c. Capitalist societies have been democratised. Working class people now have voting rights; they can vote for Socialist or Social Democratic political parties; their interests are protected by trade unions and many other pressure groups so that they are no longer economically exploited and politically powerless as in the C19th.

d. Consequently the working classes of advanced capitalist societies have not evolved from classes in themselves into classes for themselves and have not developed revolutionary class consciousness. In the UK they have been much more likely to support non-revolutionary parties of the Left, Right or Centre than to support Marxist parties membership of which is very small.

e. Weber predicted that where so-called Socialist revolutions do occur, power might pass not to the working class but to the bureaucrats in control of the newly powerful Socialist or Communist political parties. The working class would be relatively powerless both before and after the revolution. Experience in the USSR and elsewhere suggests that Weber may have been substantially correct on this point. The U.S.S.R. became a near dictatorship under Stalin and was still a very repressive regime under subsequent leaders and this led ultimately to the collapse of "Communism" in the U.S.S.R. and Eastern Europe.

The Rejection of Claims that Marx had developed a Scientific theory of Socialism

It should be noted that Marx claimed to be providing a scientific socialist analysis of capitalism and of the transition from capitalism to socialism . It was on this basis that he criticised the ideas of theorists such as Charles Fourier, Henri De Saint Simon and Robert Owen as "Utopian Socialists" claiming that they had failed to analyse capitalism in detail and that their socialist proposals took no account of the historical laws of capitalist development which, according to Marx would ultimately lead to socialist revolution. In the event history seems so far to have disproved Marx's so-called scientific theories but supporters of Marxism can always say that the theories will prove to be true eventually. What this means is that Marx's theories are actually untestable and many philosophers of science would say therefore that they cannot be described as scientific because the most important characteristic of a scientific theory is that it should be testable.

Clearly then, there are several very important criticisms of Marxist theory and critics have argued that even if it was relevant to the analysis of 19th Century capitalism, by the middle to late 20th Century, it has become irrelevant to the analysis of 20th Century capitalism which was changing in directions not predicted by Marx.

Ongoing Marxist Support for Marxist Theory

Modern Marxists would, of course, dispute this and continue to defend the Marxist theory on the following grounds:
Capitalist countries are still based on private enterprise and this means that the owners and controllers of private industry have great power over the working class.
An economically dominant Bourgeoisie continues to exist and it still exercise great influence over the institutions of the State . Thus Marxist ideas may be used to suggest that current liberal democracies are in reality far less democratic than they appear to be and that business pressure groups are actually far more powerful than all other pressure groups which contradicts classical Pluralist theories that political power is relatively evenly distributed.
Capitalist economies are grossly unequal as is indicated by statistics on the distribution of income and wealth and despite the existence of the Welfare State, great poverty, even if measured in a relative sense, continues to exist.
The overall significance of religion may have declined but schools and the capitalist-controlled media continue to brainwash the working class and prevent them from realising their true destiny, at least as Marxists would see it. Thus Marxist theory offers an important critical perspective on the nature of the socialisation process under capitalism but it must also be evaluated relative to other perspectives on the socialisation process.
Max Weber's analysis of the details of class structure are interesting but these details are of less importance than the fundamental distinction between the Proletariat and the Bourgeoisie emphasised by Marxists.
Marxists [and others] are critical also of Functionalist and Postmodernist theories of social stratification
Just because previous revolutions have been unsuccessful in the past, this does not prove that they will be unsuccessful in the future.
Alternatively it might be argued that Marxist theories , suitably modified, provide the best analysis of 21st century capitalism which must be changed fundamentally if the human race is to survive even if such changes are not necessarily to be achieved via original revolutionary Marxist processes.
Some would argue the financial crisis of 2008 and the subsequent long economic recession have signalled that Marx's arguments about the ultimate instability of capitalism are being proven correct However others argued that capitalist societies would emerge from this recession much as they have done in the but it continues to be argued that by 2024 rates of economic growth in capitalist societies remain low and that this has made it difficult to improve public services. Also, we are now beset by problems arising from climate change, the effects of the covid pandemic, the dangers of future pandemics, international political instability and the rise of the Far Right. This suggests to many Marxists that capitalism is now in deep crisis.

Summary

Marx presents an analysis of long term historical change involving transitions between successive Modes of Production.
I have concentrated in this introductory summary on Marx' analysis of the nature of C19th Century capitalism and his predictions of the revolutionary transition to socialism.
C19th Century capitalist societies are presented as class societies in which the two major social classes are the property owning Bourgeoisie and the property-less Proletariat. In Marxist terms class membership is determined by ownership or non -ownership of property [or in Marx' terms the means of production].
Capitalism is seen as a dynamic economic system which nevertheless contains the seeds of its own destruction
The social relations of production between the Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat involve exploitation and conflict since the Bourgeoisie's opportunities to generate profits depend upon its capacities to exploit the Proletariat.
The Bourgeoisie is seen as an economically and politically dominant class because it controls the private sector of the economy and exercises considerable indirect control over the State. The Bourgeoisie retains its power primarily by ideological manipulation but does sometimes resort to force involving the reliance on the support of the police and/or the armed forces.
Marx makes an important distinction between the Economic Base [or Infrastructure] of capitalist societies and the Superstructure of capitalist societies which Marx believed to be heavily influenced by the nature of the Economic Base which, according to his critics lays him open to the charge of excessive economic determinism.
Marx' class theories have attracted criticism from Weberian, Functionalist and Postmodernist perspectives and it has been argued also that he and his fellow Marxist have overstated the importance of class inequalities to the relative neglect of inequalities based around age, disability, ethnicity, gender and sexuality.
Marx' predictions of socialist revolutions in advanced Western capitalist economies have not materialised because, according to his critics, capitalist societies have changed in ways not predicted by Marx and, depending upon one's taste, the ideologies of Conservatism or Liberalism or non-Marxist Socialism provide much more accurate depictions of the capitalist system than does Marxism.
Where Marxist -inspired revolutions have occurred they have degenerated into centralised party dictatorships and certainly have not led to the emancipation of the working class as Marx had hoped and expected.
Neither is it likely that the Western European working classes will become revolutionary classes in the foreseeable future
Nevertheless despite all of these criticisms modern Marxists continue to argue that Marxist theories, suitably modified to take account of modern conditions, still provide us with the most accurate insights into the nature of contemporary capitalism which in their view remains a grossly unequal, unjust, exploitative system which restricts our capacities for self-development. As Jimmy Reid once said "the rat race is for rats" and, as human beings, we must reject it in favour of something better.

Click here for a recent Guardian article on the resurgence of Marxism.

Click here for Michael Portillo's BBC Radio 4 two part series entitled Capitalism on Trial. Mr Portillo interviews both supporters and critics of capitalism but he himself is a strong supporter of the capitalist system.

Rat Race, Invisible Hand or something in between? The debate continues.

Some [ Post GCE Advanced Level Sociology?] Extension Work: The New Age of Catastrophe: Professor Alex Callinicos 2023

Click here for The New Age of Catastrophe: A Review

When we study Marxism at an introductory level, we encounter Marx as a 19^th Century theorist who analyses the inequities of 19^th Century capitalism and claims that because of the inherent contradictions of capitalism, the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism is highly likely although fundamental reform of capitalism via the parliamentary process might also be a possibility in some cases. Classical Marxism is often criticised as excessively determinist but less determinist interpretations of classic Marxism are also available and the neo-Marxist theories of Antono Gramsci give greater emphasis to the role of human agency and suggest that the transition from capitalism to socialism in the West may be a long drawn out process.

Theories of Post Capitalism which were developed in the 1950s and 1960s suggested that for several reasons capitalism had developed in more progressive ways not predicted by Marx which rendered his theories irrelevant in the mid to late 20^th Century and made the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism seem increasingly unlikely

However, these post-capitalist theories were themselves criticised by neo-Marxist theorists such as Ralph Miliband and Nicos Poulantzas who argue that the underlying structures of capitalist societies are such that they remain highly exploitative, unequal unjust systems and that the need for socialist transition therefore remains undiminished.

This takes us to a recent contribution to neo-Marxist theory from world-famous Marxist theorist Professor Alex Callinicos in his new book The New Age of Catastrophe [2023]. Here I shall state only his key conclusions without summarising his underlying arguments. Thus, the Professor states that contemporary capitalism is beset by inter-related dimensions of crisis: climate change; the increasing likelihood of pandemics; economic stagnation; political instability most notably in the Middle East, Ukraine and in the relationships between China and the USA; and the rise of the Right. According to the Professor these crises can be resolved only by the ending of capitalism as a system. Of course, non-Marxists still believe that these crises can be resolved via reformist solutions.

Be that as it may, it seems that these are key problems which we shall all face in the coming years, and you can certainly learn more about Marxist perspectives on these issues by reading Professor Callinicos’ book.

Finally, very similar themes are addressed by Grace Blakeley in her recent book entitled Vulture Capitalism. You may click here to see Grace Blakeley discussing here book at a recent LSE Event.

Further Links
Click here for David Harvey discussing Marxism [1hr 20 mins]
Click here for Marx's Concept of Socialism by Peter Hudis
Click here for podcast of Marxist professor Richard Wolff explaining basic Marxist theory and its contemporary relevance [from 2016 and before the US election of you know who!]
Click here for a podcast from Professor Richard Wolff: How class works
Click here for Conversation article on the powers of states and corporations. New link added July 2018
Click here for Thinking Allowed on Marx and Marxism Revisited New link added May 2018
Click here for lecture; Karl Marx 200 years on [Prof. Gareth Stedman Jones for Gresham College] New links added May 2018
Click here and here for articles from the Guardian on Karl Marx New links added May 2018
Click here and here for articles on Karl Marx from The Conversation and here for an article on Friedrich Engels from The Conversation New links added May 2018
Click here for a detailed Guardian article on Marxism by Yanis Varoufakis New link added April 2018
Click here for recent Guardian article on Marxism by Giles Fraser
Click here for Stephanie Flanders' documentary on Marxism via You Tube. It's back...hopefully for good. Sorry ..It's been withdrawn again! It's back again as of August 2017!
Click here for an introduction to Marxism and the Ruling Class Ideology
Click here for an Assignment on Marxism and Capitalism
Click here for Radio 4 Analysis. Journalist Robin Aitken presents a wide ranging survey of attitudes to Marxism NEW link added June 2016
Click here for an audio discussion on the continuing relevance of the Communist Manifesto. New Link added March 2017
Click here for a detailed LSE audio lecture by Professor Gareth Steadman Jones : Karl Marx : Greatness and Illusion NEW link added November 2016
Click here for a BBC obituary and click here for Guardian items on the death of Eric Hobsbawm
Click here for a 1977 TV documentary on Karl Marx presented by famous Harvard economist J. K. Galbraith[1908-2006]. [YouTube]
New link added November 26th 2012: Click here for a series of short [approx 10 minutes] Podcasts presented on YouTube by "Marxism Today"
New Link added June 2013. Click here for an Observer article by Kevin McKenna arguing the case in favour of revolution in the UK. Notice also the critical comments following the article. What do you think? Also you could relate this article to the current publicity around the political views of Russell Brand in October-November 2013
New link added July 2013 Click here for BBC item by John Gray on Marxism and Capitalism
New links added July 2013 Click here and here and here for short YouTube lectures by radical comedian Mark Steel on Marx and Marxism
New Link added October 2013 . Click here for Guardian article: Why Marxism is on the rise again
New Link added September 2017. Click here for video lecture by Professor David Harvey on The Contradictions of Capitalism,
Click here for a video lecture from Gresham College by Professor Dominic Lieven on the February Revolution in Russia New link added February 2018
Click here Click here for a video lecture from Gresham College by Professor Catherine Merridale on Lenin and the Russian Revolution. Also Click here for a transcript. New links added January 2018
Click here for a video lecture from Gresham College by Professor Robert Service on The Fate of the October Revolution under Stalin New link added February 2018

Earlham Sociology and Politics Pages

Resources for GCE Advanced Level, Scottish Higher and Access to Higher Education Courses. I hope also that some of the more detailed documents may be useful for beginning undergraduates.

Introducing Marxism – A More Detailed Version

Russell Haggar

Introducing Marxism - A More Detailed Version

Criticisms of the Marxist Theory

Ongoing Marxist Support for Marxist Theory