The Social Class Series: Karl Marx

Social class is a central concept within the study of Sociology. It is one of the first forms of inequality one reads about when taking an introductory course in the subject. This series will look at different conceptualisations of social class given by the most popular social theorists writing on the subject. This first post explains and discusses the work of Karl Marx.

Karl Marx was interested in historical materialism: how the economic base of society shapes the classed living conditions of social groups throughout history. These historical societal structures are referred to as modes of production. For example, feudalism and the lived conditions of nobility and peasantry as well as the capitalist and the consumer within capitalism. Marx wrote about how an individual’s relation to the modes of production affects their living conditions. In particular, within the Communist Manifesto, Marx discusses two classes that are in direct opposition to each other: the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.

The bourgeoisie are the middle/upper class, those who own the means of production (e.g. factory owners). The proletariat are the working class, those who have to sell their labour to survive within society (e.g. the factory workers). Within these classes there are sub-classes. Within the bourgeoisie there is the haute (upper), moyenne (middle) and petite (petty) bourgeoisie. Within the proletariat Marx distinguishes between the proletariat as workers with a salary and the lumpenproletariat, those who can be described as residing within the underclass and the poorest within society e.g. vagabonds and sex workers.

As one can see, Marx’s conceptualisation of class is dependent upon one’s financial position as he emphasizes the economic base of society, that is resources and production which creates societal goods for exchange, as shaping one’s social class and their experience within the superstructure. The superstructure refers to societal institutions such as the family, politics, culture, religion and education. Due to the emphasis on the economic base, Marx does not credit other factors which could conceptualise one’s class. Similarly, it is difficult to ascertain how relatable the theory is to society now since the industrial revolution in which Marx was writing. Of course, it is possible to apply his account to our capitalist mode of production but what about other aspects of society. Would we still categorise sex workers as part of the underclass when so many students are engaging in this work to pay for their way through university?

“Enhancing your natural beauty”: my type of capitalist marketing

Adverts are ubiquitous. When I was growing up, the only time I would see adverts was while watching television. However, with the rise of digital technology, adverts have found themselves penetrating everyone’s life: whether you are watching a YouTube video or scrolling social media, you can even get adverts on the front of your smartphone’s lock screen dependent on push notifications of some apps. The one thing I have noticed whilst being forced to watch adverts is the rise of negative, preventative marketing of consumer products. What I mean by this is the rise of products marketed as “anti” insert an adjective here: “anti-frizz”, “anti-blackhead”, “anti-humidity”, “anti-spot”. This type of marketing perpetuates the idea that we must cover our “imperfections”, imperfections that are created and defined by these companies. Who decided that having frizzy hair, spots or blackheads was not ideal? Is there a health benefit to not having these? As far as I am aware, the only reason products aim to irradiate these characteristics is to profit from cosmetic ideals. This type of marketing is what causes self-esteem and insecurities amongst young women.

Of course, it can be said that any type of marketing involves selling a product to fulfil capitalist created material needs; but I have to say, I am a contradictory fan of capitalism and its many products. There is no way to eradicate these products, in a similar critique to that of work by Karl Marx: overthrowing capitalism is next to impossible. Therefore, my ideal beauty product marketing is selling the purpose of products as “enhancing the natural”. These products minimise the guilt I feel about indulging with capitalism and makes me feel like the product I have bought does not define my beauty: I am already beautiful, the product is just adding to this.  With or without this product my features are valid. I believe taking this marketing approach is beneficial to both companies and the consumer. The consumer will feel good about themselves, which in turn, may increase the chances of repurchasing this item. I have found that responding to this type of marketing is what has allowed me to no longer feel insecure about not wearing makeup. 10 years ago, I never would have considered going “bare-face” at work or at social events, but now it is my norm. Of course, this could also be due to my self-concept as I have aged, but I do think that positive marketing has had an impact.

Altogether, as we cannot stop the inevitability of capitalism, I believe that if companies are going to heavily market consumer products, it should be done in this positive, uplifting manner.  

Makeovers in film: The scientific superman and the prom queen

Make over films are my favourite type of film to watch when I am feeling like I need to organise my life. When at university, I would always leave my referencing until after I had finished the essay: usually the day before the hand in date. My favourite thing to do, whilst mindlessly Harvard referencing, was to watch Legally Blonde. However, only now do I realise the subliminal influence referencing had over me, watching a film set at the very institution whose referencing I was following: Harvard University. At the end of every essay I always felt like I was physically at my lowest, although intellectually at my highest. My hair was greasy, body hair overgrown, and my health was not at its best having eaten copious amounts of sharing bags of chocolate and crisps. I always felt a need that after I had finished my essays, now was the time to ‘pick myself up’ and makeover my body. Although legally blonde provided me with the girl power motivation to finish my essays and have an intellectual makeover, growing up with these types of films, I am partial to a physical makeover film.

Makeover films provide me with such inspiration and motivation to ‘sort’ my body out. However, just as Legally Blonde invokes making over my mind, it could be argued other ‘makeover’ films are more than skin deep. On the surface, She’s All That, a film in which a popular ‘Jock’ has a bet with his friend that he can make turn the ‘dorky art’ girl into the teen film beloved Prom Queen, appears to simply show the changing physical appearance of the ‘geeky’ protagonist. However, if one adopts a sociological view point, it could be argued that the subsequent ‘makeover’ of the Jock results in his openness and tolerance to go beyond the feminine beauty ideals when forming friendships.

When reflecting upon these films, it occurred to me that all films of this genre involve the smart female protagonist changing into the intelligent attractive ideal of a woman that emerged from the 1990s into the millennium. A quick Google search of male makeover films returns movies in which the male protagonist evolves into a super-human character: the Nutty Professor, Superman, Spiderman, Ironman etc. Often these makeovers are not a result of the protagonist actively changing their physical appearance for social acceptance, but rather the active result of science; the radioactive substance which turns the average man into these superheroes. Indeed, this is sociologically interesting. Men in these circumstances are given no choice with these makeovers, it is not society which decides their makeover but rather an accidental mutation generated by their contact with science (again, a male dominated field). If it was not for these mutations, the men would go about their day and would not be involved with this ‘makeover’.

Once again, a sociological look at some of my favourite viewing material has resulted in looking at my reality in a different, albeit, fractured way. Watching Clueless will never be the same again.

'Pay to Play' society and fashion: not just a neoliberal concept

Theorists claim that neoliberal society, in which individuals feel an increased responsibility for themselves, has paved way for ‘pay to play’ society. This concept refers to the idea that within society we now need to spend money in order to participate within society’s conventions. For example, the expansion of the housing rental market has resulted in individuals paying for temporary shelter as long as they can afford the rent prices; ownership is temporary. I first read about this concept a couple of years ago and I was reminded about it earlier today when playing music through YouTube. I usually listen to music through logging into either my sister’s or partner’s premium membership with Spotify. However, I began to think that YouTube provided a reliable, free, source of music if for some reason I could access Spotify either through forgetting passwords or through these being cancelled. This prompted me to think about my search for stability within a subscription filled music business. With the rise of Spotify brought services such as Apple music and MTV music, the same pay for a month of ad free and downloadable music. For some reason I did not get a sense of permanency with these pay to listen services. I was searching for stability within neoliberal pay to play society.  After reflecting upon this, I started to think about other areas of my life which involved regular upkeep; the ideology behind the ‘pay to play’ concept. I looked to my own personal list, on Google Keep, of what I needed to do: get my eyebrows shaped and tinted, dye my hair, self-tan and get my nails done. Indeed, with each one of these tasks, the result is temporary: hair grows, tan fades and nails chip. Each one of these tasks comes at a financial expense and the upkeep of my own beauty ideals comes at a cost. My body itself is engaged within pay to play society.

In a similar manner, recently I have been watching a lot of videos, mostly Buzz Feed - an entertainment website dedicated to trendy news and ‘life hacks’, about beauty and music trends in the last 100 years. These included: common eyebrow shapes, the ‘ideal’ figure of the decade and dance moves throughout the last century. Of course, comments on the videos disputed some depictions of fashion within certain decades. However, the point I wish to focus upon is it was interesting to see how pay to play society was a feature of the so-called ‘modern’ era of stable mortgages and the ‘golden age of the family’. As such, pay to play society is not a foundational concept of neoliberalism, but rather the foundation of fashion. Fashion has penetrated every type of society, as Simmel states, fashion is a social relationship between the individual and society at any given time. Therefore, it is important that concepts related within neoliberalism are not just confined to this type of society. Indeed, it may be true that sociological concepts, such as the pay to play society, are fluid in essence. Every version of society does not have a concrete set of sociological concepts that relate to it. Pay to play is not a new phenomenon; it is simply represented in a different way within current times.