Karl Marx Contributions To Sociology Essay

Karl Marx’s contributions to sociology were proven to be quite flawed, and did not pan out the way he had predicted. Most notably, Marx believed that workers with unjust restraints would become free from capitalism, seeing the start of communism. However, England’s Industrial Revolution started in the late 1700s with the introduction of steam power and new machinery, so a capitalist era was only just beginning (Manolopoulou, n.d.)

Marx’s theories provided a foundation for governments, both socialist and communist, and started a global change – whether in way of thinking, or as inspiration for important movements. So, while his theories were flawed, they did influence other sociologists who followed him in the field; ‘neo-Marxism’ still inspires others today, albeit less so than perhaps during the 1960s, when social struggles became more rife (McCarthy & Manza, 2011).

I have been exposed to how structures of power work, which was one element in Marx’s capitalism

critique. My ex-husband is the CEO of a software company, which I saw grow from a small UK-based company to a successful global one, after expanding to Silicon Valley, California where his competitors were mostly based.

I have had first hand experience in seeing how employees can be negatively affected by a boss, who displays an obvious large difference in company wage - perhaps by the car he drives, or where his children go to school. His employees were by no means subjugated, nor working class; most of them were paid six figure salaries, but living in one of America’s most expensive areas meant families could still very much struggle with such a wage (hard to believe, I know!)

I did not realize how seriously Americans view power distance, especially because in a recent UoPeople class, I learned how Hofstede’s Power Distance Index (which measures the extent to which less powerful employees accept, or expect, unequal power distribution) shows the U.S. at 40 on the cultural scale (The Hofstede Centre, n.d.) The U.K. is only slightly behind scoring 35 (The Hofstede Centre, n.d.) so I was surprised to regularly hear my ex describe Americans (being interviewed in Silicon Valley) openly pursuing higher company positions - such as Vice President (VP) - even if they are not qualified to be in such a position. I believe it is because a VP position shows a certain amount of success, power and authority - this seemed to be just as important as the salary package! Interestingly, my ex’s experience in the U.K. was almost the opposite; Brits are generally quite content (and would expect nothing more) than starting lower down in a company and working one’s way up over many years.

Many years ago I had a boyfriend in the U.K. who did not work. He said he had to ‘sign on’ to receive the national Job Seeker’s Allowance, claiming that he could not work because he had to look after his son full-time. Actually, this was not entirely true – my boyfriend’s mother looked after his son most days, which left him free to work, but he chose to stay unemployed, so he could get housing money and benefits (free money), as it worked out almost just as much money as if he worked a full-time job! Marx had a theory that described how workers can see very little return for their labor. My boyfriend certainly felt trapped in a low social class, with very little chance of ever having any control over his economic situation. He blamed it solely on two things; firstly, on how employers were mostly racist and biased against employing people of his ethnicity (British African-Caribbean descent) and secondly, his status level had been lowered because he had been left to look after a baby after the mother had left them.

In actual fact, as much as there may indeed have been some biased views against employing someone of his ethnicity, I believe that his obvious laziness and negative attitude was mostly to blame.

Furthermore, I eventually found out that he was really an abusive man who had bullied the mother of his child, forcing her to leave the child with him (as a form of control), so he can claim the financial benefits for himself and have an easier life.

These personal experiences of both ends of the spectrum do influence my views somewhat; I can definitely say that while I understand Marx’s theory about labor estrangement, I do not believe it can apply to an entire society – some people just choose to disconnect themselves from others collectively. However, the more I read about how skewed the United States’ wealth is, the more I agree with Marx’s theory. The wealthiest of U.S. citizens (the top 1% of earners) have more than what most Americans believe the top 20% should have, according to Politizane

(2012).

If my ex-husband instead sold a food product, for example – how could his employees afford to buy his product/s if he did not pay them enough? It is shocking enough that his employees (the middle class) are struggling to survive on a six-figure salary! Housecleaners and similar workers in low-paid positions have to work two or three jobs in Silicon Valley, and can barely afford to make the rent. Those workers are increasingly having to move further out of the area and have up to two hour commutes every day, just to provide for their families – this is not what most of them would expect to be the ‘American Dream’. I am very worried about this wealth gap continuing in the same direction and just where the United States is heading, particularly because I am planning to move back there by the end of the year.