Social Class And Its Relevance

The social class in America is everywhere but it is often quite hard to recognize only because it is against the American principle for the social class system to exist. Whether we know it or not, we tend to participate in the class system.. By doing so, this leads us to separate ourselves based on our social class system, including class discrimination and social mobility

Social class is a “tag” to define your status in a community. One of the main requirements you must have to be in the Upper class, is to have wealth and power. That is basically it, and obviously the absence of those characteristics could mean you are in a Middle or even in the Lower class. Sports are an activity that people do for pleasure that requires physical activity and sometimes has rules for the players to follow in order to play the game. It is most commonly played outdoors. It can improve your cardio, health, and physical condition. For example, it can prevent things like cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cancer or even mental illnesses like depression.

The axis of inequality that will be focused throughout this paper is the social class. Social class is defined as a group of individuals who are categorized according to class (i.e. poor, middle, and upper) due to their income, wealth, power, and occupation. Social class is socially constructed by the way we view how much income and wealth a person possess (Ore, 20011a, 10). In reality it is much more than that. According to the text, poverty is not only the shortage of income, but it is the rejection of opportunities and choices that leads a person to a standard way of living (Ore, 2011a, 10). Stereotyping also contributes to it being socially constructed. These stereotypes influence us by defining who is who based on their principles in each class category. This can cause some to feel worthless.

By incorporating his own sociological thinking and data, McLeod creates a whole new way of thinking about social class through his own research and findings. Most in particular to this is how he analyzed Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of cultural capital and habitus. He states, “Bourdieu’s most important contribution to reproduction theory is the concept of social capital, which he defines as the general cultural background, knowledge, disposition, and skills that are passed from one generation to the next.” (McLeod 2009: 13). This contribution of Bourdieu’s theory shows how the lower classes shape the attitudes and aspirations of both Brothers and Hallway Hangers throughout. By definition, habitus refers to values, dispositions, and expectations of particular social groups that are acquired through the activities and experiences of everyday life. Bourdieu explains how the cultural capital of having an education and social skills that can be converted to economic capital can lead the upper and working class to cultural

Social class is a division of a society based on social and economic status which can include levels of wealth, success, power of authority, and influence. Status is can be defined or grouped having common economic, cultural, or political interests.

The Communist Manifesto discusses class and class struggle as a vital part of the capitalist system. Marx and Engels state that class is made up of people who are in the same position in relation to the ownership and control of the means of wealth production.(cite) For Marx and Engels the class struggle between the upper class, or bourgeoisie class and the working class, or the proletariat class is the epitome of modern social change. Marx identified three classes: wage for labor, profit for the capitalist and rent for the landowner (Knox, 1988: 160). Since capitalism succeeded in absorbing the landlord class, which left society with only two social classes: capitalists and workers. The Marxist theory of class is opposed by those people who explain class not in terms of ownership or lack of ownership, but in terms of prestige and

Theoretical concepts on class include the ideas of Marx, Weber and Bourdieu. For Marx, “wage labourers, capitalist and landlords, form three great classes of modern society.” (Marsh, 2013, p158) Marx saw class as a way of understanding how society and history interact. A person’s class can affect them in ways they are not conscious of. It operates as a social force that influences, opportunities and governs relationships. Marx used this to explain the opposed interests between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. The bourgeoisie own the means of production, meaning they can protect what they have, whilst the proletariat sell their labour for little value, exercising much less power. (Marsh, 2013)

One of the experiences from this class that has increased my multicultural competence within socioeconomic status was attending Richard Wolff’s event. He received his PhD from Yale University in Economics and explained why we as Americans hold on to our capitalistic economy even though it has collapsed twice before and is known for being unstable. I realized that I have also never before been presented alternative ways of economics. The capitalist economy, for me, was a given, and I was glad to be made aware of other solutions and ways other people have used other forms of economy and the ways they were benefited by their way of doing organizing society.

The concept of capital, neither symbolic or cultural in specifics, is this idea that continues the cycle of power relations in society. According to Bourdieu, “it is in fact impossible to account for the structure and functioning of the social world unless one reintroduces capital in all its forms and not solely in the one form recognized by economic theory” (Bourdieu 2006:105-6). Usually the term capital refers to monetary exchanges, Bourdieu is explaining that capital takes different forms to produce an overall entity with power or capital. Like Karl Marx, Bourdieu argued that capital formed the foundation of social life and dictated one’s position within the social order. For Bourdieu and Marx both, the more capital one has the more powerful a position one has in the power relations of social life. However, Bourdieu extended Marx’s idea of capital beyond the economic sphere and into the more symbolic realm of culture. It is important to understand the difference between cultural and symbolic capital. Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital refers to the collection of symbolic elements such as skills, tastes,

Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital relates to the symbolic characteristics namely skills, tastes and preferences, mannerisms, material goods, credentials etc. that a person gains by virtue of his or her membership of a particular social class. Bourdieu emphasizes on the importance of cultural capital as a major source of social inequality. Rooted in the Bourdieu concept of cultural capital is the aspect of social environment which he called the ’habitus’. According to him, one’s habitus will allow or not allow him or her to progress in life (Bourdieu, 1986). As regards this concept of habitus, it can be said that one’s social identity/nationality may or may not offer him or her opportunities in life. The concept of habitus can be likened to the concept of social capital (Portes, 1998:6) which refers to the ability of

Stratification by economic status creates social classes. In Ireland, class structures are organised by occupation, ranging from professional workers such as doctors in class 1 to refuse collectors in class 7. The process of classifying people by occupation does not account for those in society who have no occupation such as the retired and long tern unemployed and those unable to work due to illness or disability. These people subsequently become known as the ‘declassed’. The class structure does not take account of women who work within the home as “women can be categorised according to their husband’s occupation”. The Carstairs Social Deprivation Indicator which is used in Britain takes other elements such as car ownership and overcrowding

Most societies throughout history and the world have developed a notion of social class. It is refers to hierarchical distinctions between individuals or groups within society. How these social classes have been determined has been a common topic among social scientists throughout time. Two individuals who have headed this long standing debate are Karl Marx and Max Weber. In this paper I will be summarizing Marx and Weber’s theories on social class; how they are determined, their interests, and problems that may exist among groups. I will then provide my own critiques of their arguments.

Though Marx views the communist revolution as an unavoidable outcome of capitalism, his theory stipulates that the proletariat must first develop class consciousness, or an understanding of its place within the economic superstructure. If this universal character of the proletariat does not take shape, then the revolution cannot be accomplished (1846: 192). This necessary condition does not pose a problem within Marx’s theoretical framework, as the formation of class consciousness is inevitable in Marx’s model of society. His writings focus on the idea that economic production determines the social and political structure (1846, 1859). For Marx, social class represents a person’s relation to the means of production, a relation that he believes is independent of

To start of my essay I will compare and contrast between the two theories of Karl Marx and Max Weber on the topic of social class that will be discussed widely. The inequality between people is the basis of the democratic system, which is “a political system”. It is said that “those who have the skills and abilities to perform and produce will succeed in life.” But this belief is the assumption that all people are given equal opportunities and advantages. During the 19th century Karl Marx and Max Weber were two of the most influential sociologists who developed their own theories about why inequality is maintained with social class in society. Many might argue that there are many similarities and differences between these sociologists theories, however although Marx’s and Weber’s both examined similar ideas. This essay will compare the differences and similarities between Marx and Weber’s theories of class within society, which are based on economic inequality and capitalism. And lastly this essay will demonstrate that Max Weber comes across as the greater theorist as he can relate his concept more towards today’s society. Anthony Giddens (2nd edition) quoted that “You need greater equality to achieve more social mobility.” Therefore social class is referred to a group of people with similar levels of wealth, influences, behaviours and status. Henry Ward Beecher (1813-1887) American Politician states that the “ignorant classes are the dangerous classes.”

Human societies have been class based in some way and the class factor has been the most basic dividing or differentiating factor between broad social groups. In the economic sphere that Marx’s theory focuses on, there is a class that own and control means of economic production which could be referred to as the upper class, and there is the class that maybe own nothing, but their ability to sell their labor power in return for wages which could be referred to as the middle or low class. From that understanding, and based on the conflict theory, one might argue that unequal distribution of resources and access