This imbalance is significant because it illustrates the growing tensions between the lower class and the upper class. The disparity between these social classes resulted in Marx and Engels ideology of a “new historical era,” in which the proletariats would rise and overthrow the urban elite and take a hold of the means of production. All inspired by the notion that the working class were wrongfully being exploited. It also sparked Marx’s communist ideals that he wanted to apply to society to rid of this class struggle. Similarly, this class division also resulted in many peasant rebellions against the social system of society. As Huppert reports, peasant rebellions were largely common and although many weren’t successful, they called for change and elicited fear in the city folk when they became violent. These classes also hold significance because it essentially created the modern industrial …show more content…
The social stratification that was apparent in early modern Europe affected the lives of the peasants and proletariats greatly in the social, economic, and political sense. A society that only caters to the wealthy is seen as a social evil in Marx’s and Huppert’s eyes. It’s of utmost importance to analyze and understand this European society in order to grasp the change in Europe before and after the introduction of the industrial revolution, because European society didn’t only drastically change economically. It brought about a great social change and transformed the dynamic that existed between the social classes. The similarities and differences that exist between the lower class of the peasants and proletariats along with the bourgeoise and the urban elite and the relationship they shared together provides essential clues as to why European society operated the way it did back then, which is clearly apparent through the lens Huppert and Marx
The French Revolution was a time of radical and social upheaval. Conditions in France both economically and politically caused much discontent among the people of the Third Estate. Which not only included peasants but during this time was made up of everyone that wasn’t a noble or of king-like status, such as merchants, artisans, and the middle class (bourgeoisie). After the Enlightenment, the people of France began to question their government and society. Especially the people of higher class in the Third Estate.
The stasis within the social classes after the revolution was beneficial to society. “One class did not overthrow another; the poor did not supplant the rich. But social relationships-- the way people were connected to one another-- were changed, and decisively so” (Wood 132). There was a solid relationship between higher and lower classes, and that helped maintain balance within communities, which made the new country a “giant, almost continent wide republic of nearly ten million egalitarian-minded bustling citizens who not only had thrust themselves into the vanguard of history but had fundamentally altered their society and their social relationships” (132-133).
Before the industrial revolution two there were two major classes: the nobles and the peasant. Nobles gained most of their wealth through inheritance while peasant worked the land given to them by the nobles. The peasants were forced to give up most of their harvest to the nobles in order to pay for their land. During the industrial revolution two new classes emerged the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. The bourgeoisie was the middle class and the proletariat was the working class.
In the beginning of the 19th century, the Industrial Revolution caused a massive economic spike from small-scale production to large factories and mass production. Capitalism became the prevalent mode of the economy, which put all means of production in the hands of the bourgeoisie, or the upper class. Karl Marx and Frederick Engels argue that capitalism centralizes all the wealth and power in the bourgeoisie, despite the proletariat, or the working class, being the overwhelming majority of the population. The manufacturers would exploit the common proletariat and force them to would work in abysmal conditions and receive low wages, furthering the working class poverty. “The Communist Manifesto” predicts that as a result of the mistreatment
The Hunger Games is a fairly popular and typical tale that includes a heroine, courage, and bravery. This story can be read or watched through many different lenses such as a Marxist lens, feminist lens, or even an archetypal lens. Through these lenses one can see as a reader or viewer that this is not just a story that fits into one category, but one that can fit into many. Using the Marxist and feminist lenses a viewer can gain a great depth of knowledge into The Hunger Games story itself.
This is an important task from a sociological point of view as being well read in various sociological and political ideologies aids one in forming one’s own opinions. 1. Class struggles are a fundamental part of human history:
In the Elizabethan Era, the low-class people, such as laborers and yeoman, had a struggle living than the high-class people, such as the nobles and monarchs. The Capulet family are high ranked: “They are nobles” (www.prezi.com). The Montague family are also Nobles. This explains why Romeo’s and Juliet’s mother and father have the title “Lord” or “Lady” in front of their last name. Lord Capulet held a big party for the nobles, so that means the family has a lot of money.
The difference in social classes shows how the Marxist analysis approach can be applied to Life in the Iron Mills. Social structure wasn’t always present in society, in fact towards the start of the human race, everyone was actually equal. Sure, there were the hunters and there were the gathers, but they realized they
Marx and Engel focused on class conflict as the driving force for their argument. Throughout history, there is a common theme of a caste society lasting for so long until the mistreated lower class attempt to break the cycle; but that system is only replaced with a new
For them, life was difficult. They had to work long, hard hours on the manor that belonged to their lord. Most peasants were farmers. Peasants did not have good food or clothing. They did not have the right to be educated.
Instead of there being peasants or serfs, there was now the wage-labor force. This is what helped create the rise of the free-market and capitalism and the Bourgeois and the Proletariats. Now skilled labor became a commodity in the market place, and it suffered when the factory system arose. The Western Heritage states, “In the process of becoming wage laborers, artisans gradually lost both significant ownership of the means of production, such as tools and equipment, and of control over the conduct of their own trades.” Instead of the monarchy controlling businesses and the aristocrats, now the middle classes or those that could run factories controlled businesses and turned them into a big profit.
Karl Marx talks about the role of communism and his conjecture of underlying this type of revolution. He speaks of two different class struggles, the "Bourgeoisie and Proletarians". Bourgeoisie are the people with authority, the ones who own production and are bosses of wage labor while the proletariat are the individuals with no authority, no ownership and are giving up their own power to the Bourgeoisie in order to survive. Societies began to separate and became hostile and aggressive classes. It all became about social ranking because of the increase and need of production.
Class conflict, Marx believed, was what encouraged the evolution of society. To quote Marx himself, The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles. Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one
Social class contains a lot of significance in social sciences because it sets the basis for social stratification in which people are grouped into a set of hierarchical social categories. These categories further lead up to class conflicts and social problems which we see in society today. Since the main aim of social sciences is to explain the cause and effect of any social issue, sociologists tend to first explain the definition of class and their interpretation of the term followed by its effects in a society. Among these sociologists there were two very influential personalities who developed their work to explain the definition and the formation of the social class. Karl Marx, being an economist, believes that these social classes are a direct result of economic factors.
In the Communist manifesto, a well known quote of Marx, “the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.” This is introductory to the first part of the pamphlet and a conclusion to Marx’s theory about class struggle. Marx’s highly structured on how the class struggle emerges and affects the development of a society. The development of a society from the old and from the new is the result of the conflict of classes in the society.