Class conflict

Class conflict (also class warfare and class struggle) is the political tension and economic antagonism that exists in society consequent to socio-economic competition among the social classes. As a means of effecting radical social and political changes for the social majority, class struggle is a central tenet of the philosophic works of Karl Marx and Mikhail Bakunin.[1]

Class conflict can take many different forms: direct violence, such as wars fought for resources and cheap labor; indirect violence, such as deaths from poverty, starvation, illness or unsafe working conditions; coercion, such as the threat of losing a job or the pulling of an important investment; or ideologically, such as with books and articles. Additionally, political forms of class conflict exist; legally or illegally lobbying or bribing government leaders for passage of desirable partisan legislation including labor laws, tax codes, consumer laws, acts of congress or other sanction, injunction or tariff. The conflict can be direct, as with a lockout aimed at destroying a labor union, or indirect, as with an informal slowdown in production protesting low wages by workers or unfair labor practices by capital.

Pyramid of Capitalist System
The Pyramid of Capitalist System is a simple visualization of class conflict.

Usage

In the past the term class conflict was a term used mostly by socialists and Marxists, who define a class by its relationship to the means of production—such as factories, land and machinery. From this point of view, the social control of production and labor is a contest between classes, and the division of these resources necessarily involves conflict and inflicts harm. It can involve ongoing low-level clashes, escalate into massive confrontations, and in some cases, lead to the overall defeat of one of the contending classes. However, in more contemporary times this term is striking chords and finding new definition amongst capitalistic societies in the United States and other Westernized countries.

The anarchist Mikhail Bakunin argued that the class struggle of the working class, peasantry and poor had the potential to lead a social revolution involving the overthrow of ruling elites, and the creation of libertarian socialism. This was only a potential, and class struggle was, he argued, not always the only or decisive factor in society, but it was central. By contrast, Marxists argue that class conflict always plays the decisive and pivotal role in the history of class-based hierarchical systems such as capitalism and feudalism.[2] Marxists refer to its overt manifestations as class war, a struggle whose resolution in favor of the working class is viewed by them as inevitable under plutocratic capitalism.

Pre-capitalist societies

Where societies are socially divided based on status, wealth, or control of social production and distribution, class structures arise and are thus coeval with civilization itself. It is well documented since at least European Classical Antiquity (Conflict of the Orders, Spartacus, etc.)[3] and the various popular uprisings in late medieval Europe and elsewhere.

One of the earliest analysis of these conflicts is Friedrich Engels' The Peasant War in Germany.[4] One of the earliest analyses of the development of class as the development of conflicts between emergent classes is available in Peter Kropotkin's Mutual Aid. In this work, Kropotkin analyzes the disposal of goods after death in pre-class or hunter-gatherer societies, and how inheritance produces early class divisions and conflict.

21st-century United States

Bill Moyers, for example, gave a speech at Brennan Center for Justice in December 2013 which was titled "The Great American Class War," referring to the current struggle between democracy and plutocracy in the U.S.[5] Chris Hedges wrote a column for Truthdig called "Let's Get This Class War Started," which was a play on Pink's song "Let's Get This Party Started."[6][7]

Historian Steve Fraser, author of The Age of Acquiescence: The Life and Death of American Resistance to Organized Wealth and Power, asserts that class conflict is an inevitability if current political and economic conditions continue, noting that “people are increasingly fed up… their voices are not being heard. And I think that can only go on for so long without there being more and more outbreaks of what used to be called class struggle, class warfare.”[8]

Capitalist societies

The typical example of class conflict described is class conflict within capitalism. This class conflict is seen to occur primarily between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, and takes the form of conflict over hours of work, value of wages, division of profits, cost of consumer goods, the culture at work, control over parliament or bureaucracy, and economic inequality. The particular implementation of government programs which may seem purely humanitarian, such as disaster relief, can actually be a form of class conflict.[9] In the USA class conflict is often noted in labor/management disputes. As far back as 1933 representative Edward Hamilton of ALPA, the Airline Pilot's Association, used the term "class warfare" to describe airline management's opposition at the National Labor Board hearings in October of that year.[10] Apart from these day-to-day forms of class conflict, during periods of crisis or revolution class conflict takes on a violent nature and involves repression, assault, restriction of civil liberties, and murderous violence such as assassinations or death squads. (Zinn, People's History)

Thomas Jefferson, United States

Although Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826) led the United States as president from 1801–1809 and is considered one of the founding fathers, he died with immense amounts of debt. Regarding the interaction between social classes, he wrote,

I am convinced that those societies (as the Indians) which live without government enjoy in their general mass an infinitely greater degree of happiness than those who live under the European governments. Among the former, public opinion is in the place of law, & restrains morals as powerfully as laws ever did anywhere. Among the latter, under pretence of governing they have divided their nations into two classes, wolves & sheep. I do not exaggerate. This is a true picture of Europe. Cherish therefore the spirit of our people, and keep alive their attention. Do not be too severe upon their errors, but reclaim them by enlightening them. If once they become inattentive to the public affairs, you & I, & Congress & Assemblies, judges & governors shall all become wolves. It seems to be the law of our general nature, in spite of individual exceptions; and experience declares that man is the only animal which devours his own kind, for I can apply no milder term to the governments of Europe, and to the general prey of the rich on the poor.[11]

— Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Edward Carrington - January 16, 1787

Warren Buffett, United States

The investor, and billionaire , and philanthropist Warren Buffett, one of the 10 wealthiest persons in the world,[12] voiced in 2005 and once more in 2006 his view that his class – the "rich class" – is waging class warfare on the rest of society. In 2005 Buffet said to CNN: "It's class warfare, my class is winning, but they shouldn't be."[13] In a November 2006 interview in The New York Times, Buffett stated that "[t]here’s class warfare all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning."[14] Later Warren gave away more than half of his fortune to charitable causes through a program developed by himself and computer software tycoon Bill Gates.[15] In 2011 Buffett called on government legislators to, "...stop coddling the super rich."[16]

Noam Chomsky

Noam Chomsky, American linguist, philosopher, and political activist has criticized class war in the United States:

Well, there’s always a class war going on. The United States, to an unusual extent, is a business-run society, more so than others. The business classes are very class-conscious—they’re constantly fighting a bitter class war to improve their power and diminish opposition. Occasionally this is recognized... The enormous benefits given to the very wealthy, the privileges for the very wealthy here, are way beyond those of other comparable societies and are part of the ongoing class war. Take a look at CEO salaries....

-- Noam Chomsky in OCCUPY: Class War, Rebellion and Solidarity, Second Edition (November 5, 2013)[17]

Max Weber, Germany

Max Weber (1864–1920) agrees with the fundamental ideas of Karl Marx about the economy causing class conflict, but claims that class conflict can also stem from prestige and power.[18] Weber argues that classes come from the different property locations. Different locations can largely affect one's class by their education and the people they associate with.[18] He also states that prestige results in different status groupings. This prestige is based upon the social status of one's parents. Prestige is an attributed value and many times cannot be changed. Weber states that power differences led to the formation of political parties.[18] Weber disagrees with Marx about the formation of classes. While Marx believes that groups are similar due to their economic status, Weber argues that classes are largely formed by social status.[18] Weber does not believe that communities are formed by economic standing, but by similar social prestige.[18] Weber does recognize that there is a relationship between social status, social prestige and classes.[18]

Arab Spring

Numerous factors have culminated in what's known as the Arab Spring. Agenda behind the civil unrest, and the ultimate overthrow of authoritarian governments throughout the Middle-East included issues such as dictatorship or absolute monarchy, human rights violations, government corruption (demonstrated by Wikileaks diplomatic cables),[19] economic decline, unemployment, extreme poverty, and a number of demographic structural factors,[20] such as a large percentage of educated but dissatisfied youth within the population.[21] Also, some, like Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Žižek attribute the 2009 Iranian protests as one of the reasons behind the Arab Spring.[22] The catalysts for the revolts in all Northern African and Persian Gulf countries have been the concentration of wealth in the hands of autocrats in power for decades, insufficient transparency of its redistribution, corruption, and especially the refusal of the youth to accept the status quo.[23][24] as they involve threats to food security worldwide and prices that approach levels of the 2007–2008 world food price crisis.[25] Amnesty International singled out WikiLeaks' release of US diplomatic cables as a catalyst for the revolts.[26]

Socialism

Marxist perspectives

Karl Marx
Karl Marx, 1875

Karl Marx (1818–1883) was a German born philosopher who lived the majority of his adult life in London, England. In The Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx argued that a class is formed when its members achieve class consciousness and solidarity.[18] This largely happens when the members of a class become aware of their exploitation and the conflict with another class. A class will then realize their shared interests and a common identity. According to Marx, a class will then take action against those that are exploiting the lower classes.

What Marx points out is that members of each of the two main classes have interests in common. These class or collective interests are in conflict with those of the other class as a whole. This in turn leads to conflict between individual members of different classes.

Marxist analysis of society identifies two main social groups:

  • Labour (the proletariat or workers) includes anyone who earns their livelihood by selling their labor power and being paid a wage or salary for their labor time. They have little choice but to work for capital, since they typically have no independent way to survive.
  • Capital (the bourgeoisie or capitalists) includes anyone who gets their income not from labor as much as from the surplus value they appropriate from the workers who create wealth. The income of the capitalists, therefore, is based on their exploitation of the workers (proletariat).

Not all class struggle is violent or necessarily radical, as with strikes and lockouts. Class antagonism may instead be expressed as low worker morale, minor sabotage and pilferage, and individual workers' abuse of petty authority and hoarding of information. It may also be expressed on a larger scale by support for socialist or populist parties. On the employers' side, the use of union busting legal firms and the lobbying for anti-union laws are forms of class struggle.

Not all class struggle is a threat to capitalism, or even to the authority of an individual capitalist. A narrow struggle for higher wages by a small sector of the working-class, what is often called "economism", hardly threatens the status quo. In fact, by applying the craft-union tactics of excluding other workers from skilled trades, an economistic struggle may even weaken the working class as a whole by dividing it. Class struggle becomes more important in the historical process as it becomes more general, as industries are organized rather than crafts, as workers' class consciousness rises, and as they self-organize away from political parties. Marx referred to this as the progress of the proletariat from being a class "in itself", a position in the social structure, to being one "for itself",an active and conscious force that could change the world.

Marx largely focuses on the capital industrialist society as the source of social stratification, which ultimately results in class conflict.[18] He states that capitalism creates a division between classes which can largely be seen in manufacturing factories. The proletariat, is separated from the bourgeoisie because production becomes a social enterprise. Contributing to their separation is the technology that is in factories. Technology de-skills and alienates workers as they are no longer viewed as having a specialized skill.[18] Another effect of technology is a homogenous workforce that can be easily replaceable. Marx believed that this class conflict would result in the overthrow of the bourgeoisie and that the private property would be communally owned.[18] The mode of production would remain, but communal ownership would eliminate class conflict.[18]

Even after a revolution, the two classes would struggle, but eventually the struggle would recede and the classes dissolve. As class boundaries broke down, the state apparatus would wither away. According to Marx, the main task of any state apparatus is to uphold the power of the ruling class; but without any classes there would be no need for a state. That would lead to the classless, stateless communist society.

The Soviet Union and similar societies

A variety of predominantly Trotskyist and anarchist thinkers argue that class conflict existed in Soviet-style societies. Their arguments describe as a class the bureaucratic stratum formed by the ruling political party (known as the nomenklatura in the Soviet Union), sometimes termed a "new class",[27] that controls and guides the means of production. This ruling class is viewed to be in opposition to the remainder of society, generally considered the proletariat. This type of system is referred by them as state socialism, state capitalism, bureaucratic collectivism or new class societies. (Cliff; Ðilas 1957) Marxism was such a predominate ideological power in what became the Soviet Union since a Marxist group known as the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party was formed in the country, prior to 1917. This party soon divided into two main factions; the Bolsheviks, who were led by Vladimir Lenin, and the Mensheviks, who were led by Julius Martov.

However, many Marxist argue that unlike in capitalism the Soviet elites did not own the means of production, or generated surplus value for their personal wealth like in capitalism as the generated profit from the economy was equally distributed into Soviet society.[28] Even some Trotskyist like Ernest Mandel criticized the concept of a new ruling class as an oxymoron, saying: "The hypothesis of the bureaucracy’s being a new ruling class leads to the conclusion that, for the first time in history, we are confronted with a “ruling class” which does not exist as a class before it actually rules."[29]

Non-Marxist perspectives

Social commentators, historians and socialist theorists had commented on class struggle for some time before Marx, as well as the connection between class struggle, property, and law: Augustin Thierry,[30] François Guizot, François-Auguste Mignet and Adolphe Thiers. The Physiocrats, David Ricardo, and after Marx, Henry George noted the inelastic supply of land and argued that this created certain privileges (economic rent) for landowners. According to the historian Arnold Toynbee, stratification along lines of class appears only within civilizations, and furthermore only appears during the process of a civilization's decline while not characterizing the growth phase of a civilization.[31]

Proudhon, in What is Property? (1840) states that "certain classes do not relish investigation into the pretended titles to property, and its fabulous and perhaps scandalous history."[32] While Proudhon saw the solution as the lower classes forming an alternative, solidarity economy centered on cooperatives and self-managed workplaces, which would slowly undermine and replace capitalist class society, the anarchist Mikhail Bakunin, while influenced by Proudhon, insisted that a massive class struggle by the working class, peasantry and poor was essential to the creation of libertarian socialism. This would require a (final) showdown in the form of a social revolution.

Fascists have often opposed class struggle and instead have attempted to appeal to the working class while promising to preserve the existing social classes and have proposed an alternative concept known as class collaboration.

Chronology

Riots with a basically nationalist background are not included.

Classical antiquity

Middle Ages

Modern era

GeorgheDoja
The rebellion of György Dózsa in 1514 spread like lightning in the Kingdom of Hungary where hundreds of manor-houses and castles were burnt and thousands of the gentry killed.

See also

References

  1. ^ the New Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought (1999) Allan Bullock and Stephen Trombley, Eds., p. 127.
  2. ^ Marx, Karl; et al. (1848). The Communist Manifesto. [1]: www.marxists.org.
  3. ^ The Class Struggle in the Ancient Greek World G.E.M. DE Ste. Croix Cornell University Press 1981 ISBN 0-8014-9597-0
  4. ^ Frederick Engels, The Peasant War in Germany, marxists.org
  5. ^ Moyers, Bill (12 December 2013). The Great American Class War Archived 2013-12-22 at the Wayback Machine. Brennan Center for Justice. Retrieved 25 January 2014.
  6. ^ The Pathology of the Rich - Chris Hedges on Reality Asserts Itself pt1 Archived 2013-12-09 at the Wayback Machine The Real News. 5 December 2013. Retrieved 25 January 2014.
  7. ^ Hedges, Chris (20 October 2013). Let’s Get This Class War Started Archived 2013-10-21 at the Wayback Machine. Truthdig. Retrieved 25 January 2014.
  8. ^ Full Show: The New Robber Barons Archived 2014-12-23 at Wikiwix. Moyers & Company. December 19, 2014.
  9. ^ Greg Palast, Burn baby burn "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2007-12-30. Retrieved 2008-03-10.CS1 maint: Archived copy as title (link)
  10. ^ Kaps, Robert W. (1997). Air Transport Labor Relations. Section 3: Major Collective Bargaining Legislation: Southern Illinois Press. p. 51. ISBN 0-8093-1776-1.
  11. ^ Jefferson, Thomas. "Letter to Edward Carrington - January 16, 1787". Archived from the original on January 16, 2013.
  12. ^ "The World's Billionaires". forbes.com. Archived from the original on 24 April 2013. Retrieved 1 May 2018.
  13. ^ Buffett: 'There are lots of loose nukes around the world' Archived 2016-04-30 at the Wayback Machine CNN.com
  14. ^ Buffett, Warren (Nov 26, 2006). "In Class Warfare, Guess Which Class is Winning". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2017-01-03.
  15. ^ "Warren Buffett Gives Away Fortune". Huffington Post. 4/12/2012. Archived from the original on 2 May 2012. Retrieved 16 May 2012. Check date values in: |date= (help)
  16. ^ Buffett, Warren (Nov 2011). "Stop Coddling the Super Rich". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 16 May 2012. Retrieved 16 May 2012.
  17. ^ Chomsky, Noam (2013), OCCUPY: Class War, Rebellion and Solidarity, Second Edition (November 5, 2013), Zuccotti Park Press, archived from the original on October 16, 2014, retrieved October 14, 2014
  18. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k Blackwell Reference Online.[2]. Retrieved November 24, 2008.
  19. ^ Cockburn, Alexander (18–20 February 2011). "The Tweet and Revolution". Archived from the original on 2011-02-27.
  20. ^ Korotayev A, Zinkina J (2011). "Egyptian Revolution: A Demographic Structural Analysis". Entelequia. Revista Interdisciplinar. 13: 139–165. Archived from the original on 2016-10-20.
  21. ^ "Demographics of the Arab League, computed by Wolfram Alpha". Archived from the original on 2011-03-02.
  22. ^ "Ahmadinejad row with Khamenei intensifies". Al Jazeera. 6 May 2011. Archived from the original on 20 April 2012.
  23. ^ Ecker, Al-Riffai, Perrihan. "Economics of the Arab awakening". International Food Policy Research Institute. Archived from the original on 15 April 2012. Retrieved 25 May 2012.CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list (link)
  24. ^ The Other Arab Spring Archived 2016-11-29 at the Wayback Machine April 7, 2012 Thomas L. Friedman New York Times op-ed
  25. ^ Javid, Salman Ansari (27 January 2011). "Arab dictatorships inundated by food price protests". Tehran Times. Archived from the original on 14 June 2011. Retrieved 13 February 2011.
  26. ^ Peter Walker "Amnesty International hails WikiLeaks and Guardian as Arab spring 'catalysts' Archived 2017-02-02 at the Wayback Machine", The Guardian, Friday 13 May 2011
  27. ^ Đilas, Milovan (1983, 1957). The New Class: An Analysis of the Communist System (paperback ed.). San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. ISBN 0-15-665489-X. Check date values in: |year= (help)
  28. ^ Harpal, Brar (October 1993). Trotskyism or Leninism?. London. p. 647. ISBN 1874613036.
  29. ^ Ernest, Mandel. "Why The Soviet Bureaucracy is not a New Ruling Class (1979)". Archived from the original on 22 May 2017. Retrieved 26 April 2017.
  30. ^ Augustin Thierry: Recueil des monuments inédits de l'histoire du Tiers état
  31. ^ Toynbee, Arnold (1947). "The Nature of Disintegration". In Dorothea Grace Somervell. A Study of History: Abridgment of Volumes I - VI. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. p. 365. ISBN 0-19-505081-9.
  32. ^ Pierre Proudhon, What is Property?, chapter 2, remark 2.
  33. ^ see Daniel Guérin, Class Struggle in the First French Republic, Pluto Press 1977

Further reading

External links

Charles A. Beard

Charles Austin Beard (November 27, 1874 – September 1, 1948) was, with Frederick Jackson Turner, one of the most influential American historians of the first half of the 20th century. For a while he was a history professor at Columbia University but his influence came from hundreds of monographs, textbooks and interpretive studies in both history and political science. His works included a radical re-evaluation of the founding fathers of the United States, who he believed were motivated more by economics than by philosophical principles. Beard's most influential book, An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States (1913), has been the subject of great controversy ever since its publication. While frequently criticized for its methodology and conclusions, it was responsible for a wide-ranging reinterpretation of American history of the founding era. He was also the co-author with his wife Mary Beard of The Rise of American Civilization (1927), which had a major influence on American historians.An icon of the progressive school of historical interpretation, his reputation suffered during the Cold War era when the assumption of economic class conflict was dropped by most historians. Richard Hofstadter (a consensus historian) concluded in 1968: "Today Beard's reputation stands like an imposing ruin in the landscape of American historiography. What was once the grandest house in the province is now a ravaged survival".Conversely, Denis W Brogan believed that Beard lost favour in the Cold War not because his views had been proven to be wrong, but because Americans were less willing to hear them. In 1965 he wrote; "The suggestion that the Constitution had been a successful attempt to restrain excessive democracy, that it had been a triumph for property (and) big business seemed blasphemy to many and an act of near treason in the dangerous crisis through which American political faith and practice were passing".Hofstadter nevertheless praised Beard, saying he was "foremost among the American historians of his or any generation in the search for a usable past".

Class war

Class war or class warfare may refer to:

Class conflict, a conflict between socio-economic groups

Class War, a UK anarchist newspaper and organisation

Class Warfare, a 1996 book of interviews with Noam Chomsky

Cla$$war, a comic book series by Rob Williams

Class War (album), a 2007 album by Wisdom In Chains

Conflict theories

Conflict theories are perspectives in sociology and social psychology that emphasize a materialist interpretation of history, dialectical method of analysis, a critical stance toward existing social arrangements, and political program of revolution or, at least, reform. Conflict theories draw attention to power differentials, such as class conflict, and generally contrast historically dominant ideologies. It is therefore a macro-level analysis of society.

Karl Marx is the father of the social conflict theory, which is a component of the four major paradigms of sociology. Certain conflict theories set out to highlight the ideological aspects inherent in traditional thought. While many of these perspectives hold parallels, conflict theory does not refer to a unified school of thought, and should not be confused with, for instance, peace and conflict studies, or any other specific theory of social conflict.

Ethnic violence

Ethnic violence refers to violence expressly motivated by ethnic hatred and ethnic conflict. It is commonly related to political violence, and often the terms are interchangeable, or one is used as a pretext for the other when politically expedient.

Forms of ethnic violence which can be argued to have the character of terrorism may be known as ethnic terrorism or ethnically-motivated terrorism.

"Racist terrorism" is a form of ethnic violence dominated by overt racism and xenophobic reactionism.Ethnic violence in an organized, sustained form is known as ethnic conflict or warfare (race war), in contrast to class conflict, where the dividing line is social class rather than ethnic background.

Care must be taken to distinguish ethnic violence, which is violence motivated by an ethnic division, from violence that just happens to break out between groups of different ethnicity motivated by other factors (political or ideological).Violent ethnic rivalry is the subject matter of Jewish sociologist Ludwig Gumplowicz's Der Rassenkampf ("Struggle of the Races", 1909); and more recently of Amy Chua's notable study, World On Fire: How Exporting Free Market Democracy Breeds Ethnic Hatred and Global Instability.

Some academics would place all "nationalist-based violence" under ethnic violence, which would include the World Wars and all major conflicts between industrialised nations during the 19th century.

Finnish nationalism

Nationalism was a central force in the History of Finland for the last two centuries. The Finnish national awakening in the mid-19th century was the result of members of the Swedish-speaking upper classes deliberately choosing to promote Finnish culture and language as a means of nation building—i.e. to establish a feeling of unity between all people in Finland including (and not of least importance) between the ruling elite and the ruled peasantry. The publication in 1835 of the Finnish national epic, the Kalevala, a collection of traditional myths and legends which is the folklore common to the Finns and to the Karelian people (the Finnic Russian Orthodox people who inhabit the Lake Ladoga-region of eastern Finland and present-day NW Russia), stirred the nationalism that later led to Finland's independence from Russia.

Nationalism was contested by the pro-Russian element and by the internationalism of the labor movement. The result was a tendency toward class conflict over nationalism, but in the early 1900s the working classes split into the Valpas (class struggle emphasis) and Mäkelin (nationalist emphasis).

Hanna Mina

Hanna Mina (Arabic: حنا مينة‎) (9 March 1924 – 21 August 2018) was a Syrian novelist, described in Literature from the "Axis of Evil" as the country's "most prominent".His early novels belong to the movement of social realism, and focus on class conflict; his later works contain "a more symbolic analysis of class differences". His writing on the suffering of ordinary people was partly inspired by his own experiences, alternately working as a stevedore, barber and journalist; his autobiographical short story, "On the Sacks", was published in 1976.Several of his works are set during the period of the French Mandate of Syria, or in the period immediately following independence.Mina has authored about 40 novels, varying in imaginary value and narrative significance. But his achievement lies in the foundation he laid for this literary structure. For his collective works and novels, Mina was awarded the Arab Writer's Prize in 2005.

Height restriction laws

Height restriction laws are laws that restrict the maximum height of structures.

There are a variety of reasons for these measures. Some restrictions limit the height of new buildings so as not to block views of an older work decreed to be an important landmark by a government. For example, In the Russian capital of Saint Petersburg, buildings could not be taller than the Winter Palace.Other restrictions are because of practical concern, such as around airports to prevent any danger to flight safety.

Height restriction laws sometimes become a point of contention in cities due to their use in regulating the growth of the housing supply. Fast growth of housing supply benefits renters by producing low prices and a lot of choice, while slow or no growth in housing supply benefits property owners by allowing them to charge higher prices. In this way, height restriction laws often become part of a class conflict even when their original purpose was innocuous.

Marxian class theory

Marxian class theory asserts that an individual’s position within a class hierarchy is determined by his or her role in the production process, and argues that political and ideological consciousness is determined by class position. A class is those who share common economic interests, are conscious of those interests, and engage in collective action which advances those interests. Within Marxian class theory, the structure of the production process forms the basis of class construction.

To Marx, a class is a group with intrinsic tendencies and interests that differ from those of other groups within society, the basis of a fundamental antagonism between such groups. For example, it is in the laborer's best interest to maximize wages and benefits and in the capitalist's best interest to maximize profit at the expense of such, leading to a contradiction within the capitalist system, even if the laborers and capitalists themselves are unaware of the clash of interests.

Marxian class theory has been open to a range of alternate positions, most notably from scholars such as E. P. Thompson and Mario Tronti. Both Thompson and Tronti suggest class consciousness within the production process precedes the formation of productive relationships. In this sense, Marxian class theory often relates to discussion over pre-existing class struggles.

Marxism

Marxism is a theory and method of working class self-emancipation. As a theory, it relies on a method of socioeconomic analysis that views class relations and social conflict using a materialist interpretation of historical development and takes a dialectical view of social transformation. It originates from the works of 19th-century German philosophers Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels.

Marxism uses a methodology, now known as historical materialism, to analyze and critique the development of class society and especially of capitalism as well as the role of class struggles in systemic economic, social, and political change.

According to Marxist theory, in capitalist societies, class conflict arises due to contradictions between the material interests of the oppressed and exploited proletariat—a class of wage labourers employed to produce goods and services—and the bourgeoisie—the ruling class that owns the means of production and extracts its wealth through appropriation of the surplus product produced by the proletariat in the form of profit.

This class struggle that is commonly expressed as the revolt of a society's productive forces against its relations of production, results in a period of short-term crises as the bourgeoisie struggle to manage the intensifying alienation of labor experienced by the proletariat, albeit with varying degrees of class consciousness.

In periods of deep crisis, the resistance of the oppressed can culminate in a proletarian revolution which, if victorious, leads to the establishment of socialism—a socioeconomic system based on social ownership of the means of production, distribution based on one's contribution and production organized directly for use. As the productive forces continued to advance, Marx hypothesized that socialism would ultimately be transformed into a communist society: a classless, stateless, humane society based on common ownership and the underlying principle: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs".

Marxism has developed into many different branches and schools of thought, with the result that there is now no single definitive Marxist theory. Different Marxian schools place a greater emphasis on certain aspects of classical Marxism while rejecting or modifying other aspects. Many schools of thought have sought to combine Marxian concepts and non-Marxian concepts, which has then led to contradicting conclusions. However, lately there is movement toward the recognition that historical materialism and dialectical materialism remains the fundamental aspect of all Marxist schools of thought.Marxism has had a profound and influential impact on global academia and has expanded into many fields such as archaeology, anthropology, media studies, political science, theater, history, sociology, art history and theory, cultural studies, education, economics, ethics, criminology, geography, literary criticism, aesthetics, film theory, critical psychology and philosophy.

National communism

National communism refers to the various forms in which communism has been adopted and/or implemented by leaders in different countries. In each independent state, empire, or dependency, the relationship between class and nation had its own particularities. The Ukrainian communists Shakhrai and Mazlakh and then Muslim Sultan Galiyev considered the interests of the Bolshevik Russian state at odds with those of their countries. This was followed after 1945 by the Yugoslav communist leader Josip Broz Tito when he attempted to pursue an independent foreign policy.

Communism as Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels envisioned it was meant to be very internationalist as proletarian internationalism was expected to place class conflict well ahead of nationalism as a priority for the working class. Nationalism was seen as a tool that the bourgeoisie used to divide and rule the proletariat (bourgeois nationalism). Whereas the influence of international communism was very strong from the late 19th century through the 1920s, the decades after that—beginning with socialism in one country and progressing into the Cold War and the Non-Aligned Movement—made national communism a larger political reality.

Political Marxism

Political Marxism (PM) is a strand of Marxist theory that places history at the centre of its analysis.

PM was developed as a reaction against ahistorical models of Marxist analysis in the debate on the origins of capitalism. The PM critique brought social agency and class conflict to the center of Marxism. In this context, Robert Brenner and Ellen Wood founded PM as a distinct approach to rehistoricise and repoliticise the Marxist project. It was a movement away from structuralist and timeless accounts towards historical specificity as contested process and lived praxis. This research programme has since expanded across the social sciences to include the fields of history, political theory, political economy, sociology, international relations and international political economy.The term Political Marxism itself was coined during the Brenner Debate of the late 1970s as a criticism of the work of Brenner by the French Marxist historian Guy Bois. Bois distinguished Brenner's 'political Marxism' from 'economic Marxism'. As such, the label 'Political Marxism' has not always been accepted by the scholars to whom it has been applied.Researchers linked with PM today include Benno Teschke, Hannes Lacher and George Comninel.

Professional and working class conflict in the United States

In the United States there has long been a conflict between the working class majority and the professional class. The conflict goes back to the workers revolution and age of unionized labor in the late nineteenth century. Since the 1870s and the rise of professionalism, the daily routine of American workers has been largely designed by professionals instead of foremen.

Today, most American workers –many of whom earn middle-range incomes and work in white-collar occupations – are usually not resentful of the professionals, though a feeling of disconnect persists. Even nowadays there is a large visible discrepancy between professionals whose main job duties include visualizing and directing the day of other workers and those who carry out the orders. While the work of professionals and managers is usually largely self-directed and appeals to the interest of the individual, that of middle-range income white-collar and blue-collar workers is closely supervised and tends to greatly stray from the worker's actual interests.

Yet another reason for resentment toward the professional middle class on the part of the working class stems from the embedded feelings of anti-intellectualism. When combined working class workers seem to often be under the impression that their better paid, professional managers are not actually "doing anything" as most of their duties are to conceptualize and outline their ideas.

Ralf Dahrendorf

Ralf Gustav Dahrendorf, Baron Dahrendorf, (May 1, 1929 – June 17, 2009) was a German-British sociologist, philosopher, political scientist and liberal politician. A class conflict theorist, Dahrendorf was a leading expert on explaining and analyzing class divisions in modern society, and is regarded as "one of the most influential thinkers of his generation." Dahrendorf wrote multiple articles and books, his most notable being Class Conflict in Industrial Society (1959) and Essays in the Theory of Society (1968).

During his political career, he was a Member of the German Parliament, Parliamentary Secretary of State at the Foreign Office of Germany, European Commissioner for External Relations and Trade, European Commissioner for Research, Science and Education and Member of the British House of Lords, after he was created a life peer in 1993. He was subsequently known in the United Kingdom as Lord Dahrendorf.He served as director of the London School of Economics and Warden of St Antony's College, University of Oxford. He also served as a Professor of Sociology at a number of universities in Germany and the United Kingdom, and was a Research Professor at the Berlin Social Science Research Center.

Social class

A social class is a set of subjectively defined concepts in the social sciences and political theory centered on models of social stratification in which people are grouped into a set of hierarchical social categories, the most common being the upper, middle and lower classes.

"Class" is a subject of analysis for sociologists, political scientists, anthropologists and social historians. However, there is not a consensus on a definition of "class" and the term has a wide range of sometimes conflicting meanings. In common parlance, the term "social class" is usually synonymous with "socio-economic class", defined as "people having the same social, economic, cultural, political or educational status", e.g., "the working class"; "an emerging professional class". However, academics distinguish social class and socioeconomic status, with the former referring to one's relatively stable sociocultural background and the latter referring to one's current social and economic situation and consequently being more changeable over time.The precise measurements of what determines social class in society has varied over time. Karl Marx thought "class" was defined by one's relationship to the means of production (their relations of production). His simple understanding of classes in modern capitalist society are the proletariat, those who work but do not own the means of production; and the bourgeoisie, those who invest and live off the surplus generated by the proletariat's operation of the means of production. This contrasts with the view of the sociologist Max Weber, who argued "class" is determined by economic position, in contrast to "social status" or "Stand" which is determined by social prestige rather than simply just relations of production. The term "class" is etymologically derived from the Latin classis, which was used by census takers to categorize citizens by wealth in order to determine military service obligations.In the late 18th century, the term "class" began to replace classifications such as estates, rank and orders as the primary means of organizing society into hierarchical divisions. This corresponded to a general decrease in significance ascribed to hereditary characteristics and increase in the significance of wealth and income as indicators of position in the social hierarchy.

Social corporatism

Social corporatism (also called social democratic corporatism) is a form of economic tripartite corporatism based upon a social partnership between the interests of capital and labour, involving collective bargaining between representatives of employers and of labour mediated by the government at the national level. Social corporatism is a major component of the Nordic model of capitalism and to a lesser degree the West European social market economies. It is considered a compromise to regulate the conflict between capital and labour by mandating them to engage in mutual consultations that are mediated by the government.Generally supported by nationalist and/or social-democratic political parties, social corporatism developed in the post-World War II period, influenced by social democrats and Christian democrats in European countries such as Austria, Norway, the Netherlands, Germany and Sweden. Social corporatism has also been adopted in different configurations and to varying degrees in various European countries.

The Nordic countries have the most comprehensive form of collective bargaining, where trade unions are represented at the national level by official organizations alongside employers unions. Together with the welfare state policies of these countries, this forms what is termed the Nordic model. Less extensive models exist in Germany and Austria, which are components of Rhine capitalism.

Sorelianism

Sorelianism is advocacy for or support of the ideology and thinking of French revolutionary syndicalist Georges Sorel. Sorelians oppose bourgeois democracy, the developments of the 18th century, the secular spirit, and the French Revolution, while supporting classical tradition. A revisionist of Marxism, Sorel believed that the victory of the proletariat in class struggle could be achieved only through the power of myth and a general strike. To Sorel, the aftermath of class conflict would involve rejuvenation of both the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.With the seeming failure of Syndicalism, in 1910 he announced his abandonment of socialist literature and claimed in 1914, using an aphorism of Benedetto Croce that "socialism is dead" due to the "decomposition of Marxism". Sorel became a supporter of Maurrassian integral nationalism beginning in 1909, which he considered as having similar moral aims to syndicalism despite being enemies materially. In this sense, Sorelianism is considered to be a precursor to fascism. However, he became disillusioned with these ideas with the first world war, and from 1918 until his death in 1922 he would be a supporter of the then Russian revolution and Communism, which he considered a revival for Syndicalism.

Strong Medicine

Strong Medicine is a medical drama with a focus on feminist politics, health issues, and class conflict, that aired on the Lifetime network from 2000 to 2006. The series was created and produced in part by Whoopi Goldberg, who made cameos on the series, and Tammy Ader. The series starring Rosa Blasi, Janine Turner, and Patricia Richardson. Strong Medicine was the highest-rated original drama on basic cable in 2001.

The Hawks and the Sparrows

The Hawks and the Sparrows (Italian: Uccellacci e uccellini, literally "Birds of prey and Little Birds") is a 1966 Italian film directed by Pier Paolo Pasolini. It was entered into the 1966 Cannes Film Festival where a "Special Mention" was made of Totò, for his acting performance.The film can be described as partially neorealist, and deals with Marxist concerns about poverty and class-conflict. It features the popular Italian comic-actor Totò accompanied on a journey by his son (played by Ninetto Davoli).

Under Capricorn

Under Capricorn is a 1949 British historical thriller film directed by Alfred Hitchcock about a couple in Australia who started out as lady and stable boy in Ireland, and who are now bound together by a horrible secret. The film was based on the novel Under Capricorn (1937) by Helen Simpson, with a screenplay by James Bridie. It was adapted to the screen by Hume Cronyn. This was Hitchcock's second film in Technicolor, and like the preceding color film Rope (1948), it also featured 10-minute takes.

The film is set in colonial Sydney, New South Wales, Australia during the early 19th century. Under Capricorn is one of several Hitchcock films that are not typical thrillers; instead it is a mystery involving a love triangle. Hitchcock considered it to be one of his worst films and a disaster. Although the film is not exactly a murder mystery, it does feature a previous killing, a "wrong man" scenario, a sinister housekeeper, class conflict, and very high levels of emotional tension, both on the surface and underneath.

The title "Under Capricorn" refers to the Tropic of Capricorn, which bisects Australia. Capricornus is a constellation; Capricorn is an astrological sign dominated by the goat, which is a symbol of sexual desire.

Schools
of thought
Theory &practice
Issues
People
History
Culture
Economics
By region
Lists
Related
topics
Marxist phraseology and terminology
Philosophy and politics
(Marxist)
Economics and sociology
(Marxian)
Marxist–Leninist
Trotskyist
Maoist
Theory and practice
Aspects
Variants
Internationals
People
Related topics
Anthem
Schools of thought
Key topics and issues
Concepts
Organizations
See also

This page is based on a Wikipedia article written by authors (here).
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.