Analyzing Two Theories of Business Power

Pluralism is based on the ideology that “competition among interest groups produces compromise and balance among competing policy preferences”. (Paletz, Owen, and Cook) Politically, pluralism the distribution of power throughout a government. A misconception is that pluralism

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels were also discussed. Together, these philosophers outlined the Marxist theory, a theory that involves collectivism as the mechanism to run the economy of a society. Although their efforts were recognized, it did not, however, help bring hegemony to an end, especially due to constant change in technology. The chapter continues with saying that along with the advancement in technology, social domination has become much more complex, ultimately concluding that the difference in

Pluralism is one of the three theories of government, which is a condition or system in which two or more states, groups, principles, sources of authority, etc., coexist. Pluralism is a combination of different sorts of people among the many are like-minded people, unions, professional associates, and business lobbyists. For pluralism to operate and to be successful in establishing the common

Pluralism has been historically important, in regards to religion, and American society. This has held true since the American colonies liberated themselves from

Pluralism is a state in which racial and ethnic categories, though distinct, have equal social standing. (Macionis, 2012 pg.84) So in stating what it is we are looking to foster gives us a better idea of what to expect if we do foster a climate of acceptance and cultural pluralism in the United States. Though to get there we need to teach, I mean really teach each other and about one another in every way form what we eat to how we celebrate traditions. We need to get everyone involved as much as possible, which means in schools, jobs, and community. By doing all of this we will have a better understanding of one another which well level out the minorities with the majorities and make acceptance easier all around.

Designed over two hundred years ago, Karl Marx’s philosophy defines specific characteristics known today as the Marxist approach. In this critical approach, whomever holds the power and controls the factories or means of production, consequently controls the whole society. Marx’s opinion states that the laborers running the factories and thus holding the means of production should be the ones holding the power. However, this idea rarely holds true in practical society. Frequently, Marx notes, powerful people hire others to carry out the labor. This division of power reflects current culture. Two main classes or categories of people exist, the bourgeoisie and proletariat. The bourgeoisie is the powerful, or those who are in charge of

Two-tiered pluralism differs from pluralism because of the effect it has upon the minority groups of the nation. While there is an equal legal backing for all racial and ethnic communities, minorities are still undermined by the system thus becoming segregated. Moreover in politics, minority groups tend to be under seclusion even though the current enacted laws grant equality at all stages. The amount of resources given to minorities are very different to elites leading to the practices and outcomes to be unequal (Lecture 6). Pluralism is very different from the two-tiered pluralism framework as it focuses upon group-based competition and that everyone has equal opportunities

Some theorists believe that ‘power is everywhere: not because it embraces everything, but because it comes from everywhere… power is not an institution, nor a structure, nor possession. It is the name we give to a complex strategic situation in a particular society. (Foucault, 1990: 93) This is because power is present in each individual and in every relationship. It is defined as the ability of a group to get another group to take some form of desired action, usually by consensual power and sometimes by force. (Holmes, Hughes &Julian, 2007) There have been a number of differing views on ‘power over’ the many years in which it has been studied. Theorist such as Anthony Gidden in his works on structuration theory attempts to integrate basic

Pluralism is a worldview in which the society members structure their culture based on acceptance and diversity. These common traits all strive for the common good of all and also realize there is some truth in other beliefs (Pluralism, 2015). This worldview stresses the importance of tolerance of other religions but does not however deviate from their own beliefs.

Another concept that brought about inequality among the bourgeoisie and proletariat is the labour theory of value. As stated in the textbook Classical and Contemporary Sociological Theory, “One of the basic truths of capitalism is that it takes money to make money, and the more money a business owner has at his or her disposal, the more ability the business owner has to generate profit-making schemes” (Appelrouth and Edles: 25). In this case, the bourgeoisies are at a benefit as they own the means of production, while the proletariat are at a disadvantage as they don’t have capital to make money. Marx’s ‘general formula for capital’ explains the class and power relations that predominate in modern capitalist society through the formula M-C-M. Marx describes this law of value to be beneficial to the bourgeoisies as they increase profits and capital. Bourgeoisies are able to do this because they have the money (M) to buy capital, which converts their money into commonality (C), which they then use to produce other commodities that are sold for money (M). Bourgeoisies predominate the proletariats through power relations as the formula is inversed for the working class, C-M-C. The working class sells their labour through commodity (C), which then is exchanged for money (M) and used to buy commodities (C) necessary for survival. The C-M-C

According to Marx, those who have power over society exert their control as a result of economic power and therefore determine the dominant ideologies within the superstructure model. Being the greater economical and cultural barrier, the structure provides the social world with norms, rules and beliefs pertaining to age, gender, class and one’s cultural identity. Within that structure it becomes apparent that inequalities restrict your agency in terms of nationality, geographical location, class etc. In agreement with Marx, the dominant views are generally the views of the superior class; the elite. One example

Those who control means of production have power over the rest of the society (Morrison, 2006). Marx saw two very different social classes.

The decline of aristocracy in The Communist Manifesto began with Karl Marx’s statement, “The history of all hitherto existing societies is the history of class struggles.”1 Marx recognized the ideals of the social rank, which has influenced every society throughout history. The two social classes described by Marx were the Bourgeoisie, or the upper class, and the Proletariats, or the lower class. Before the Bourgeoisie came to social power, landowners and corporate organizations ran the society. Marx believed that the severe separation of the two classes greatly troubled society and that the two classes must coexist as one with each other.2

Marx conceived the base and superstructure approach that defines capitalist society. The base relates to all that is a function of production in society and conversely, the superstructure, which can be said to be derived from the base, relates to the values, culture, ideology and the governing bodies of society. The former creates and supports the latter by a process of legitimisation of the economic activities, and in turn, the superstructure ensures the processes remain in place. Class domination plays a large part in this process of organisation; for example, private education providing better opportunities for advancement and primary socialisation into the higher echelons of society. However, a counter argument claims that the state is just as involved in the stresses and “struggles of civil society’’ as opposed to being a mere extension of it for the pure benefit of a particular class interest (Held 2001, in Hall and Gieben 2001, p 113).

The terms ‘socialism’ and liberalism’ are used a lot nowadays, and many people often mistake one for the other. In order to differentiate between these two terms, one must keep in mind the clear-cut differences by defining the prevailing ideology of each term. The tenets of socialism assert that the state should wield total economic power by manipulating prices of goods and wages of workers.