Before considering issues that are associated with the concept of "class approach" (KP), it is necessary to find out what this term is associated with and for what purposes it is used.
KP is a method from the point of view of which social phenomena are analyzed and evaluated by assigning each person to a certain category, based on his property condition. Classes were 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 the class approach is found in sources related to the nineteenth century. Let's consider this concept in more detail.
The essence of the class approach
First of all, it consists in recognizing the fact that any activity of society is examined 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 ondirectly from class position. To put it simply, the rich have their quirks, and the poor have theirs…
Understanding or lack of understanding of such processes in no way affects the process itself. People will always earn different amounts of money, afford different amounts of goods, have different levels of education, accept different values. Therefore, whether we like it or not, whether it is considered inhuman or vice versa, classes exist. And each belongs 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 the 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 can be seen in political life. In the process of solving certain problems on which the further existence of society depends, a clash of interests of different classes arises. It is impossible to come to a solution of such issues without the use of a class approach.
The essence of the state
This is what determines its content, mode of existence, activities, social purpose. Any state is considered from two sides:
- Formal (it refers to the organization of political power).
- Meaningful (whose interests it serves).
The second is the prevailing one. It includes five different approaches:
- Classy. With thispoint of view, the state is defined as a device of political power, where the class that has more property rules. In this case, the state is aimed at satisfying the interests of the economically stronger class - the bourgeoisie.
- General social. Here, political power is aimed at satisfying the interests of citizens as a whole, in a word, a compromise is found. Thus, if we compare the class and general social approaches, the second one is more progressive.
- Religious. In this situation, the vector of state attention is aimed at realizing the interests of a particular religious movement. Some countries that use this approach are guided by religious factors.
- Nationalist. In this case, the state, although it calls itself democratic, carries out such reforms and makes such political decisions that exclusively satisfy the indigenous population. These include a ban on the right to vote, various restrictions in educational institutions, the 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 power are aimed at primarily satisfying the needs of one race at the expense of satisfying the needs of another or even others.
It is worth noting that any approach can take the leading position, depending on the historical development of the country. The prevalence of one point naturally entails a decrease in the influence of others. As history teaches, a shift in emphasis to meeting the needs of the bourgeoisie always causes discontent among the population and leads to radical changes. And vice versa, when the vector of attention is aimed at meeting the needs of those in need, the people respond positively to the authorities. But it should be understood that none of the approaches is represented in society in an absolute sense.
The purpose of the society of a certain 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 one, and Karl Marx was the founder of the theory.
Marxist theory
Marx's class approach is as follows: the division of society occurred as a result of the social division of labor. Also, when personal property appears, as well as relationships that have arisen on its basis.
The author of the class approach to the analysis of society approached with all seriousness, having studied its behavior and functions. The manifestation of the process of division is noticeable in labor exploitation, as well as in the appropriation of benefits received as a result of production. The appearance of classes occurs in two ways - the separation of the tribal community of the exploitative elite and the enslavement of the poor, prisoners. To clearly understand the whole concept, one should know what a "public class" is.
A bit of ancient history
History says society is on the movedevelopment faced the problem of inequality in terms of property, and then in social understanding. That is why 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 was innovating politically.
The ruler of the state carried out a reform of the structure of the community of Ancient Rome, based on the territorial-property approach. As a result, the civilian population was divided into five classes. The distribution was carried out depending on the volume of ownership. In other states of the era of antiquity, the distribution into 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 a person, and other criteria. At the same time, no one denied this division, which they are trying to do at this stage of development.
Class approach in different historical eras
While social differentiation has never been denied, its causes have been interpreted differently at certain times.
- Antiquity. Philosophers of the era believed that absolutely everyone is destined for a certain activity, comes into this world with abilities and capabilities that differ from others. Therefore, distribution into groups was considered inevitable, a person's belonging to one or another class was determined from birth.
- Middle Ages. At that time, philosophers preferred to believe that the assignment of a person to a certain class was the will of God. And thereforethe study of the issue from a scientific point of view "frozen".
- New time. They substantiated the division of society into classes by social conditions and upbringing. The era precedes Marxist theory. At this time, political economy believed that economic income determines a person's belonging to a certain class.
Revolutionary studies of Marx
Thanks to the class approach in history, it is possible to analyze how the views of theorists have changed over time. Initially, social differentiation was considered from an ideological point of view. Closer to the present time, 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 the understanding of history from a materialistic point of view.
Based on it, the scientist was able to prove that class is a historical category. In the earliest historical stages, the classification of the population did not occur. Its appearance is a consequence of the social division of labor. A person's belonging to a class depends on the relations of production. When estates are formed, develop, clashes occur. The lower strata are trying to eliminate the resulting inequality, while the ruling strata, in turn, are trying with all their might to maintain their dominant position. As a result, the driving force of the class struggle is the race for the opportunity to dispose of 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 viewview.
They influence the 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 substantiated the emergence of estates and the theory of their interaction, but also conducted research based on the direction of their development. Marx concluded that classes must cease to exist. This becomes possible through political reform, as a result of which the dictatorship of the proletariat will be 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, concisely substantiated and proved by him.
Opinions of opponents
It is quite logical that the adherents of the bourgeoisie met the theory with a flurry of criticism. However, the theory was supported by arguments, it was not possible to challenge it. Therefore, at every opportunity, they try to criticize the author of the KP, most often not from a scientific point of view. The opinions of modern scientists about the Marxist theory of the origin of the state, the class approach are ambiguous. However, it is always taken into account when conducting research.
Opponents of the 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. Moreover, the source of acquiring material goods today is to a greater extent intellectual property,than material. Thus, scientists do not deny the correctness of the Marxist theory, but they do not completely imitate it either.
Max Weber's research
Today, there are two most popular bourgeois theories: civilizations and stratifications. The latter was elucidated after Marx's death and at first 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 belonging to a class 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 income sufficient for civilizational existence.
Quality of life is defined as worthy. Most people in developed and developing countries are classified as middle class. From the theory of Max Weber, a trend has arisen that studies social inequalities and social mobility, named after the founder - neo-Weberian. In general terms, the concept consists in bringing to the fore differences that do not depend on property status. Instead of analyzing existing property, racial, political, sexual, social, professional differences are explored. Many scientists believe that it will be most accurate to attribute a person to a selected group by applying both theories: Marx and Weber. This approachprovides a more complete picture of the analysis. However, it cannot be said that the theories complement each other.
Lenin's class fragmentation concept
Before you begin to explore the phased application of the approach, you need to know what classes - the dominant, lower, middle or otherwise - 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 ratio of property to the means of production. It was from this criterion that two differentiations of modern society were formed - the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. The first are characterized by the absence of property, the second - on the contrary. That is, the bourgeoisie dominates the proletarians. However, today this is not quite enough for an accurate characterization of society. Only a combination of several characteristics can determine whether a person belongs to a suitable class. Below we consider the characteristics of these features, which Lenin singled out. Vladimir Ilyich names four:
- First of all, these are large clusters of people who differ in their place in the historical scheme 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 society's economy is based on the interaction of wage labor and capital.
- Relation to the means of production. The main criterion by which the scheme of inter-estate interactions, class struggle is determined.
- If we are talking about a place in the social distribution of labor, we take into account the factthe person is busy. Often, when interpreting this sign, difficulties arise, as there is a misunderstanding of what type of labor this or that professional activity of a person belongs to.
- Method and amount of profit. Earlier in society there was a clear differentiation of ways to make a profit. At present, a person belonging to the proletarian class can easily make a profit in many ways, including bourgeois ones. For example, to be a shareholder and receive a percentage share from them. To avoid confusion, the primary way to earn money should be considered.
These characteristics help to attribute a person to a certain class with an integrated approach. It should be understood that, in addition to a clear distinction between people into groups, there are intermediate ones containing related characteristics from both classes.
Application of 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 actually be a "member" of the class in question. Next, you should do a study of the political state at the moment. All groups that influence 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 with its like. At the same time, external circumstances are taken into account.
Based on this, a set of measures is being created to highlight the results of using the class approach.
Based on this article, a conclusion suggests itself. The existence of the CP has been 100% proven for a long time, starting from the era of the emergence of the social division of labor. And even if some scientists, tearing their hair off their heads, tried to find a refutation of the Marxist theory, they did not succeed and will not succeed, 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, as it labels everyone. But one cannot deny the fact that in any state there are classifications to which each person belongs. This division is conditional, but undeniable. And we will never get away from him anywhere.
