Before considering the issues that are associated with the concept of "class approach" (KP), you should find out what this term is associated with and for what purpose it is used.
KP is a method from the point of view of which analysis and evaluation of social phenomena is carried out by assigning each person to a certain category based on his property condition. Classes formed at a certain historical stage, provoking social inequality. After some political reforms, this inequality becomes more or less noticeable. For the first time, the definition of a class approach is found in sources dating back to the nineteenth century. Consider this concept in more detail.
The essence of the class approach
First of all, it consists in the recognition of the fact that any activity of society is investigated on the basis of division into categories. However, the key role here is played by the understanding of the fact that a person unites with other members of the public, based on interests that depend directly on the class position. Simply put, the rich have their own quirks, and the poor have their own ...
An understanding or lack of understanding of such processes in no way affects the process itself. People will always earn a different amount of money, allow themselves a different amount of wealth, have a different level of education, take different values. Therefore, whether we want it or not, whether it is considered inhuman or vice versa, but classes exist. And each refers to one of them. This can explain the topical relevance of the approach, regardless of place and era. Even despite the number of attempts to refute it. However, we will return to opponents a little later.
Literally any social activity can be viewed through the prism of this approach. Of course, the need for this is not always justified, but this fact does not change anything. The highest degree of manifestation of the approach is visible in political life. In the process of solving certain problems, on which the further existence of society depends, a clash of interests between different classes arises. It is impossible to come to a solution to such issues without applying the class approach.
The essence of the state
This is what determines its content, mode of existence, activity, social purpose. Any state is considered from two sides:
- Formal (the organization of political power refers to it).
- Content (whose interests contributes).
The second is prevailing. It includes five different approaches:
- Class. From this point of view, the state is defined as a device of political power, where the class with a large amount of property rules. In this case, the state is aimed at satisfying the interests of the economically stronger class - the bourgeoisie.
- Socially. Here, political power is aimed at satisfying the interests of citizens as a whole, in a word, there is a compromise. Thus, when comparing class and social approaches, the second is more progressive.
- Religious. In this situation, the state’s attention vector is aimed at realizing the interests of a particular religious movement. Some countries using this approach focus on religious factors.
- Nationalist. In this case, the state, although it calls itself democratic, carries out such reforms and takes such political decisions that satisfy only the indigenous population. This includes a ban on the right to vote, various restrictions on educational institutions, an obligation to learn the national language in order to be able to get the desired job in state enterprises, receiving social benefits, and others.
- Racial. A typical approach for countries with a multiracial population. In it, the activities of the authorities are aimed at primarily satisfying the needs of one race by satisfying the needs of another or even others.
It is worth noting that any approach may take the dominant position, depending on the country's historical development. The prevalence of one item naturally entails a decrease in the influence of others. As history teaches, a shift in emphasis to meet the needs of the bourgeoisie always causes discontent among the population and leads to radical changes. Conversely, when the vector of attention is aimed at meeting the needs of those in need, the people respond positively to power. But it is worthwhile to understand that not one of the approaches is represented in society in absolute terms.
The purpose of society of a particular country depends on its essence. From it follows the nature of the functioning of the state, its main tasks and goals. In all this stratification, the class approach was considered the only correct and accurate, and the founder of the theory is Karl Marx.
Marxist Theory
The class approach of Marx is as follows: the division of society occurred as a result of the social division of labor. Also, with the appearance of personal property, as well as relationships arising on its basis.
The author of the class approach to the analysis of society approached in all seriousness, having studied its behavior and functions. The manifestation of the division process is noticeable in labor exploitation, as well as in the appropriation of the benefits received as a result of production. The emergence of classes occurs in two ways - the separation of the tribal community of the exploitation elite and the conversion into slavery of the poor, prisoners. To clearly understand the whole concept, you should know what a "social class" is.
A bit of ancient history
History has it that in the course of development, society has faced the problem of inequality in terms of property, and then in the social sense. Therefore, they came up with conditional classifications, which include a person according to his social and property status. For example, in the sixth century BC, Rome underwent innovations from a political point of view.
The ruler of the state carried out a reform of the structure of the community of Ancient Rome, based on a territorial-property approach. As a result, the civilian population was divided into five classes. Distribution was carried out depending on the volume of ownership. In other states of the antiquity, the distribution of groups was a complex process. Since the differentiation took into account not only the presence of property or its absence, but also the origin of the person, and other criteria. Moreover, no one denied this division, what they are trying to do at this stage of development.
Class approach in different historical eras
Despite the fact that social differentiation has never been denied, its causes at a certain time were interpreted differently.
- Antiquity. Philosophers of the era believed that absolutely everyone is intended for a certain activity, a world comes in this with abilities and capabilities that differ from others. Therefore, the distribution of the groups was considered inevitable, a person's membership in a particular estate was determined from birth.
- Middle Ages. At that time, philosophers preferred to consider that assigning a person to a certain class was the will of God. And therefore, the study of the issue from a scientific point of view, "froze."
- New time. They substantiated the division of society into classes by social conditions and education. The era precedes Marxist theory. At this time, political economy believed that economic income determines a person’s membership in a particular estate.
Marx's revolutionary research
Thanks to the class approach in history, one can analyze how the views of theorists have changed over time. Initially, social differentiation was considered from an ideological point of view. Closer to date, they began to be explained in terms of economic relations. The final addition to the study of the issue was made by the same Karl Marx. At one time, he made a breakthrough - opened an understanding of history from a materialistic point of view.
Based on it, the scientist was able to prove that the class is a historical category. At the earliest historical stages of the classification of the population did not occur. Its appearance is a consequence of the social division of labor. Belonging to a class depends on production relations. When the estates are formed, developed, clashes occur. The lower strata are trying to eliminate the inequality that has formed, the dominant ones, in turn, by all means maintain the dominant position. As a result, the driving force of the class struggle is the race for the possibility of controlling the power that drives the state, as well as for the chance to influence political conditions. The outcome is changes in society from a political, social point of view.
Those have an impact on emerging economic relationships. Therefore, the conclusion follows: the struggle between the lower and ruling classes is the engine of the further development of society. However, Karl Marx not only justified the emergence of estates and the theory of their interaction, but also conducted research based on the direction of their development. Marx concluded: classes must cease to exist. This becomes possible due to political reform, as a result of which the dictatorship of the proletariat is established. The state, from the point of view of the class approach, will cease to be divided into them. The role of the proletariat in this process was clearly, succinctly substantiated and proved by him.
Opinions of opponents
It is logical that the adherents of the bourgeoisie met the theory with a flurry of criticism. However, the theory was supported by arguments; it did not work to challenge it. Therefore, they try to criticize the author of the Communist Party at every opportunity, most often not from a scientific point of view. The opinion of modern scholars about the Marxist theory of the origin of the state, the class approach is ambiguous. However, it is always taken into account when conducting research.
Opponents of Marxist theory believed that on the whole it correctly describes the stratification of the population based on property factors. However, the theory is relevant only until the twentieth century. Modern scientists believe that today it is almost impossible to attribute a person to the chosen estate, based on property. The more source of acquiring material wealth today is more intellectual property than material. Thus, scientists do not deny the correctness of the Marxist theory, but they do not fully imitate it.
Max Weber Research
To date, there are two of the most popular bourgeois theories: civilization and stratification. The latter was illuminated after the death of Marx, and at first it was opposed to his theory. The founder of the theory of stratification is Max Weber. The approach explains the more complex structure of determining a person’s affiliation to the estate not only by economic factors. A part of society branches off, is assigned to a conditional category on the basis of the functions it performs in society. Thanks to the work of Weber, the concept of the middle class appeared. This is a social community that receives sufficient income for civilization.
Quality of life is defined as decent. Most people in developed and developing countries are ranked among the middle class. From the theory of Max Weber, a flow has arisen that explores social inequalities and social mobility, named after the founder - Neo-Weberian. In general terms, the concept is to bring to the fore the differences that are not dependent on property status. Instead of analyzing existing property, racial, political, gender, social, and professional differences are examined. Many scientists believe that it will be most possible to attribute a person to the selected grouping by applying both theories: Marx and Weber. This approach provides a more complete picture of the analysis. However, it cannot be said that theories complement each other.
The concept of class fragmentation of Lenin
Before you begin the study of the phased application of the approach, you need to know which classes - dominant, lower, middle or other - are inherent in our era. Engels and Marx failed to give an exhaustive definition of the concept under study. They only singled out the main criterion — the relation of property to the means of production. It is from this criterion that two differentiations of modern society were formed - the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. The former are characterized by the absence of property, the latter - on the contrary. That is, the bourgeoisie dominates the proletarians. However, for an accurate description of society today this is not quite enough. Only a combination of several characteristics can determine a person’s belonging to a suitable class. Below we consider the characteristics of these signs that Lenin singled out. Vladimir Ilyich names four:
- First of all, these are large crowds of people who differ in their place in the historical pattern of production. The essence of the characteristic is that the class is a historical community, and therefore, over time, the composition of the estates has constantly changed. At the moment, the economy of society is based on the interaction of wage labor and capital.
- Attitude to the means of production. The main criterion by which the pattern of inter-class interactions, class struggle is determined.
- When it comes to a place in the social distribution of labor, the fact of what kind of work a person is involved is taken into account. Often when interpreting this feature, difficulties arise, since there is a misunderstanding of what type of work this or that professional activity of a person belongs to.
- Method and amount of profit. Previously, in society there was a clear differentiation of ways to make a profit. At present, a person belonging to the class of proletarians can easily profit in many ways, including bourgeois ones. For example, to be a holder of shares and receive a percentage share from them. To avoid confusion, you should consider the primary way of earning.
These characteristics help to attribute a person to a certain class with an integrated approach. It is worthwhile to understand that, in addition to clearly distinguishing people into groups, there are intermediate ones that contain related characteristics from both classes.
Application approach
To apply this approach, one should take into account a certain estate, subjectively accept its position. However, it should be understood that a person may not really be a "participant" in the class in question. Next, do a study of the political situation at the moment. All groups affecting the political situation in the state are considered. Then you need to find out from an objective point of view, the interests of which class they protect, put in the forefront. Further, in what relations is the party similar to it? In this case, external circumstances are taken into account.
Based on this, a set of measures is being created to cover the results of using the class approach.
Based on this article, a conclusion suggests itself. The existence of the Communist Party has been fully proved for a long time, starting from the era of the social division of labor. And although some scientists, tearing their hair off their heads, tried to find a refutation of Marxist theory, nothing came of and will not work out, since the facts of the presence of social stratification are undeniable.
However, in the modern world, many researchers, in particular liberals, consider the class approach akin to racism and nationalism, since it puts a label on everyone. But one cannot deny the fact that in any state there are classifications to which each person belongs. This division is arbitrary, but undeniable. And we will never get away from him anywhere.