Power in Society – Marx Conflict Perspective & Elite Theory

Social Analysis

By

Karyn Krawford 08/09

1

Introduction

Power is present in each individual and in every relationship. It is defined as

the ability of a group to get another group to take some form of desired action,

usually by consensual power and sometimes by force (Holmes, Hughes &

Julian, 2007).

In society governments, organisations and an elite class of people make

decisions that affect the lives of a large mass of other people. A significant

amount of research shows these decisions are often made to serve their own

economic interests and values of which includes the means of production and

property ownership (Holmes et al, 2007; Walters & Crook, 1995; Haralambos

& Holborn, 1990; McGregor, 2000).

These decisions cause inequality in society and resentment from people who

are excluded from the decision making process. The unequalness of this

decision-making and power allocation enables the fortunate to enforce their

will on the less fortunate (Graetz, 2001, Walters & Crook, 1995).

This essay discusses power from two sociological views; the Conflict

perspective, predominately from Karl Marx and the Elite theory perspective.

These theories show that power is distributed unequally in society where

governments, a ruling class, media and business elites hold the majority of

power over others.

2

Conflict Perspective

Carl Marx, an 18th century sociologist, was one of the original theorists to

develop a conflict perspective on how society functions. Following Marx was

Ralph Dahrendorf, 19th century, post beginning of capitalism, who developed

the theory further (Holmes et al, 2007). This perspective is mostly concerned

with Marx’s deep structures of unseen power within the capitalist system

(Walters & Crook, 1995).

The central areas of focus from this perspective are; (1) the classes that exist

in society, (2) inequalities of society and (3) how society functions to serve the

powerful class and disadvantage the others, thereby causing conflict (Holmes

et al, 2007; Haralambos & Holborn 1991). Examples of these conflicts include

wars, revolutions, strikes and communism (McGregor, 2000).

These classes that are in conflict are broadly broken into a ruling capitalist

class and working class of which aim to further their interests at the expense

of the other group (Walters & Crook, 1995). The working class who only

have their labour power to sell are at the disposal of employers in situations

where no unions exist and need to avoid unemployment (Holmes et al, 2007).

Bordering these two class concepts are small businesses, which Marx

referred to as ‘petty bourgeoisie’. This group are subject to ether joining the

working class or becoming part of the capitalist class if sufficient surplus is

accumulated. Social surplus contributes to conflict in societies where class

3

exists and is a struggle for control over profit. Thus one appropriates it and

the other produces it (Holmes et al, 2007, Walters & Crook, 1995).

Thus, Marx looked at how the working class is disadvantaged by becoming

attached to the external world of commodities and alienating themselves from

their inner world also known as externalisation, the materialistic world of

consumerism. This process advances the interests of capitalists who thereby

hold a strong interest, with help from the media, in ensuring the working class

are kept busy working by consuming the products of their labour (Holmes et

al, 2007, Hurst, 2000).

Classes cause inequality in society and Marx believed individuals hold their

own personal power, which is in harmony with each other and nature (Holmes

et al, 2007), rather than wrestling with it (Hurst, 2000). Hurst (2000)

elaborated further by stating that people become enslaved when their actions

are controlled by something outside themselves to benefit the capitalist

system that is controlling the labour division. People are no longer whole but

split into these alienated specialist divisions.

Furthermore, Marx believed it is those who own the means of material

products also own the means of intellectual production because it is their

ideas that dominate through more ‘air time’ (Holmes et al, 2007; Akard, 2001).

“In other words, workers unwittingly reproduce the power that rules over them”

(Holmes et al, 2007, pg 37).

4

Marx viewed a nation state as a collective power of which political parties rule

on behalf of society by making rules and regulations in favour of the ruling

class (Holmes et al, 2007, Hurst, 2000), based on rational decisions (Walters

& Crook, 1995) and by the growing faith in science explaining reality (Hurst,

2000).

The nation state today however, is increasingly transformed through

devolution, deregulation of public policy and globalisation through the impact

of multinational corporations on government power and ability to regulate

economic activity. This has resulted in a shift of power from national

boundaries to a global level (Tanner, 1999; Gotham, 2004).

5

Elite Theory

Among elite theories, a distinctive theory was developed by an American

Sociologist C.Wright Mills, called critical elite perspective (Akard, 2001). It

consists of two central concepts, which are the power elite group and the

managerial class (Holmes et al, 2007). Both groups are given decision-

making power that affects the lives of others (Walters & Crook, 1995), and are

unaccountable for their decisions (Haralambos & Holborn, 1991).

The elite is defined as a network of business, government, military and media

leaders who exchange favours, have common educational and social

backgrounds. These people consciously conspire to maintain control over the

masses (Holems et al, 2007, Walters & Crook, 1995). Akard (2001) splits this

group into two organised segments, governing elites who hold broad political

power and non-governing.

Similarly a highly paid managerial class are identified as those who produce

profits for the company, thereby given a lot of power and control over others

(Holmes et al, 2007; Haralambos & Holborn, Graetz, 2001). Consequently

power is passed down from owner to manager who is in control on a daily

basis (McGregor, 2000).

In order for the elite to maintain this control they need to be aware of their

membership to the group, act in ways to further their own interests and

exchange information between members to conspire the control (Holmes et

6

al, 2007) and to close the access for others making them exclusive (Akard,

2001). For example in Australia there is believed to be an increasing interlock

of relationships particularly in the media, sport and education sectors which

can be observed by the number of executives each sitting on each the boards

of these organisations (Holmes et al, 2007).

A number of elite theorists have written about the networking and interlocking

of this group (Holmes et al, 2007), also known as mobility (Holmes et al, 2007,

Walters & Crook, 1995). For example Australia used to be known as ‘the

Welfare State’ in which it served to support mostly men but also women,

supporting the role family plays, by means of pensions, health and education.

This has changed dramatically over the past two decades as the Howard

government continued to privatise many government and state welfare

providers, including education institutes. At the same time corporation’s

profits rose dramatically (Holmes et al, 2007).

In order for this change in ‘welfare state’ to occur as desired by the ‘Elite’

groups, there needed to be a cross over of board representatives in many

powerful institutions, channelling power into the hands of these exclusive

power holders (Holmes et al, 2007, Walters & Crook, 1995).

These power institutions include the three government powers that are stated

in the Australian Constitution; the legislative (two houses of parliament), the

executive (public service) and judiciary (court system) that they must be kept

separate in order for democracy to work. An example of this is when the

7

Howard government, along with cooperation from the media, pressured the

‘executive’ (public service) to gain election votes (Holmes et al, 2007).

Clearly the Australian Constitution requirements have not been adhered to in

numerous contexts. Holmes et al (2007) provides a list of examples of the

mobile crossover of senior political, media and business people sitting on

boards of large and powerful organisations and group memberships.

Moreover Holmes et al, (2007) and Haralambos & Holborn (1991) explain the

new economy today consists of two to three hundred privately owned giant

corporations where this mobility takes place and wealth is more concentrated.

This concentration of board crossovers, government officials and departments

that also cross over into the private sector have further embedded the

capitalist society we now live in.

8

Conclusion

Both perspectives discussed the unequal power from one group over another.

The research on ruling and working classes, explains how the powerful

classes dominate over the rest of the population known as ‘mass’, both

physically and mentally (Holmes et al, 2007, Hurst, 2000,).

A political elite group of people is explained and acceptable in both Marxist

and elite perspectives. This is due to the common ground regarding the

degree of mobility and the idea of the state’s job in sharing out wealth

produced by a working class, kept dependant of this through the privately

owned companies. This privatisation and rising of large multinational

corporations has produced an increase in the power of management.

The media plays a prominent role in portraying a materialistic world through

the idealistic interests of the upper classes which are also materialistic to keep

profits and power concentrated in their control, while keeping the working

class focused less on internal needs and more on external means with

production and consumption.

The nation state plays a role in assimilating power in society, serving the

interests of the upper classes, however this power has reduced significantly

over the years. Despite this, there appears to be an increase in mobility of the

elite, utilising the powers of mass media, governments and multinational

organisations to meet their needs.

9

Finally, there is insufficient space in this paper to cover other significant

realms of power affecting society such as the impact of many smaller groups,

globalisation, charismatic leadership, the Internet and cyberspace.

10

Reference List

Akard, P. (2001), Social & Political Elites. Encyclopedia of Sociology. Vol 4,

2nd edition. Macmillan Reference. USA

Gotham, K. (2004), State. Encyclopedia of Social Theory. Ed. George Ritzer.

Vol. 2. Sage Publications inc

Graetz, B. (2001) Social Self, Global Culture: An Introduction to Sociological

Ideas. Oxford University Press. Melbourne.

Haralambos, M. & Holborn, M. (1991) Sociology; Themes & Perspectives. 3rd

edition. CollinsEducational, Hammersmith, London.

Homes, D., Hughes, K. & Julian, R. (2007), Australian Sociology. A Changing

Society. 2nd Edition. Pearson Education Australia. Frenchs Forest, NSW.

Hurst, D.E. (2000), The Janus-Faced Nature of Society. Living Theory: The

Application of Classical Social Theory to Contemporary Life. Allyn & Bacon.

Boston.

Jamrozik, A. & Nocella, L. (2002), Inequality: The Underlying Universal Issue

in Social Problems. Sociology of Social Problems. Cambridge: University

Press

11

McGregor, C. (2000) Class. Sociology: Australian Connections. 2nd Edition.

Allen & Unwin, Sydney, Australia.

12

Sydney Homeless man makes $50,000 a year begging – The

Australian & The Daily Telegraph

Both newspapers’ coverage of this issue is exactly the same. This is

because they are both owned by News Limited.

The article highlights social issues that include amount of money

earned by beggars, tax payments, welfare and drugs consumed by

homeless people.

- The article reports a man made the above figure from begging in a

CBD location in Sydney over the period of one year.

- He earns different amounts on busier days and slower days.

- Fridays he earns at least $250 and some days stays longer if he is

earning more.

- The man is viewed earning $30 in 20 minutes

- That day he had earned $60 before the afternoon rush began

- His money is tax-free

In these highlighted points the media clearly targets how much

money the man earns, as it is the headline and is mentioned here

eight times. It suggests he shouldn’t be earning this much and

people give too much money to the homeless are happily paid more

than the average worker tax-free.

13

The man didn’t state his earnings over the year therefore the

journalist has calculated the figure assuming he earns this much

each week on a daily basis for the past year.

1. The article proposes he works hard, long hours, every day of the

week sitting on a crate on the corner of a busy location with his sign

up asking for money. Yet the picture of the man sitting with a sign

up and money dropped in front does not look like he is exerting

much energy.

2. The day of the interview the man took a three-hour break and

had breakfast at a takeaway. The man in the picture looks quite

overweight and possibly obese.

3. The man says he gets more money at the end of the day when

people are going home happy.

This media coverage shows power is used by the media report to

portray the man as lazy, taking advantage of people at times when

they feel happy. The homeless man does not have the power to

publish his situation in his own words.

His money is tax-free; he doesn’t get sick days or superannuation.

The article compares a beggar with a worker, suggesting an

alternative way of making money and avoiding tax.

14

This comparison is unfair, as most people would not be faced with

the same issues as a homeless person such as hygiene, health,

food, clothing and shelter. Homeless people are concerned about

survival and not if they are getting superannuation when they

‘retire’.

From a Marxist perspective the ruling class and from the Elite theory

perspective, the elite group, have invested interests in the mass

population to be kept working, more importantly however that

people invest in the consumption of available products. This

homeless man’s stated medical expenses and takeaway food for

example, contributes to the cycle of consumption where his money

given by workers goes back into the system eventually.

By Karyn Krawford

09/2009

15

16