The Bast Theory Of Class Conflict In Karl Marx

Karl Marx believed that the mode of production was the defining element of any period in history, and he called this economic structure the base of that society. In fact, he believed that the ideas and culture of a given stage were derived from the mode of production. He referred to ideas and culture as the ‘superstructure’, which grew up from the more fundamental economic ‘base’.

According to Marx, the inequitable control over factors of production and property leads to creation of ‘class’, and these classes will have clashing interests, which will inevitably leed to conflict. This concept of ‘Class Conflict’ is intrinsic to Marxist Theory.

Means Of Production As The Basis Of Class

“The origin of social power in the ownership or control

Eventually, given the maturing of capitalism, the growing disparity between life conditions of bourgeoisie and proletariat, and the increasing homogenization within each class, individual struggles become generalized to coalitions across factories. Finally, class conflict is manifested at the societal level. Class consciousness is increased, common interests and policies are organized, and the use of and struggle for political power occurs.

Six elements may be identifies in Marx's view of class conflict.

 Classes are authority relationships based on property ownership.

 A class defines groupings of individuals with shared life situations, thus interests.

 Classes are naturally antagonistic by virtue of their interests.

 Imminent within modern society is the growth of two antagonistic classes and their struggle, which eventually absorbs all social relations.

 Political organization and Power is an instrumentality of class struggle, and reigning ideas are its

Most significantly over the “over-concentration” on economic relationships and attributing all conflicts to economic causes as well as excessively critical and pessimistic view of capitalism policy.

Yet, the brilliance of Marx's analysis of capitalism and its effects on workers, on capitalists themselves, and on entire sociocultural systems can’t be denied. Marx grasped its origin, structure, and workings. He then predicted with an astonishing degree of accuracy its immediate evolutionary path. Today, we see instances of this ‘class struggle’ manifesting itself across countries. Statics show that the income disparity grows every year. Society has been perceived as split between the “99%” (the regular people) and the “1%” (the connected and privileged superrich getting richer every day).

Thus, according to me, the contributions of Marx to the history of economic thought can’t be confined to the formal Marxist theory and it is possible to integrate his intrinsic understanding of socioeconomic systems into contemporary policies without adopting his theory as a