Structuralism And Marxism

1566 Words7 Pages
Introduction (301/300)
Through the history of social science, it is a one of the great issue that what kinds of factors determine human history. Plenty of philosophers, historian, political scientists, sociologist and anthropologists tried to answer this question since ancient to the postmodern era. This essay attempts to compare several theories that discuss the factor of social and political regime change from the viewpoints of material aspect of the societies.
In the first part of this essay, how structuralism and Marxism understand “material” is argued with basic explanation of both theories. This attempt might make clear the different recognition of the basic structure of the society in two theories. In this part, the famous K. Marx’s
…show more content…
This part reveal that communism revolution is not really reflected the material condition of the society and the political regime change had sometimes occurred in USSR unlike the theory of Marxism that insisted the end of politics in communism society. Furthermore, also some of several important factors that create social change are ignored from Marxism are suggested in this part.
The third part explain how material condition influence social and political structure with an actual example of genocide in Rwanda in 1994. The combination of anthropologists research accounts that the tragic massacre was occurred not by the political actors or class struggle, but by the shortage of land that makes brutal conflict to obtain foods resources.
The core of this essay is a brief attempt to discuss how we can understand structure of our society that is based on the material conditions and how those elements are accounted to sociopolitical regime change in Marxism and structuralism theory.

What is the structure when we focus on the aspect of material in one society?
…show more content…
Marx 1999). However, the fast proletariat revolution was occurred in Russia, China, Viet Nam, and other many countries where industrial workers have not “involved in increasingly socialized labour process” (A. Callinicos 2004). So, those revolutions are result of cultural and material interaction such as books, arms, and propaganda rather than capitalism.
Callinicos(2004) pointed out that Marxist account that politics will be terminated after proletarian revolution and dictatorship. However, it is observed that there are still political confrontation in domestic politics of those socialism countries from not only the wider definition of the politics that competition to obtain power and resources (Check reference in WP) but also the definition of Marxist, class struggle (A. Callinicos 2004) because the actual socialism countries faced on the class struggle between nomenklatura and people or among each section of the bureaucratic systems (Need
Open Document