Assess Marxist explanations of the role of the state in todays society

Authors Avatar

Assess Marxist explanations of the role of the state in today’s society

Marxist theories believe that society is based on conflict between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. The bourgeoisie own the means of production and are the ruling class, whereas the proletariat own their labour power and are the working class. Therefore, varying Marxist theories argue how the state can be seen either as an instrument of the ruling capitalist class or as a complex set of systems which reflects the contradictions of the society it is part of.

Marx and Engels argued that the ruling class used their power to exploit subordinate classes and that the state was used to promote ruling class interests. Marx and Engels describe the state as “but a committee for managing the affairs of the whole bourgeoisie” and that the state gives the illusion of serving the will of the people. However, Engels accepted that the state could act independently, such as if two classes were competing for domination in a society. This is slightly evident in the London riots of 2011, where the state acted independently to ensure that rioters were not getting out of hand with their violence and pursuit of social equality.

Modern Marxists have interpreted the state in different ways. Miliband (1969) adapts an Instrumental approach and believes that the state is often the direct tool of the ruling class. He argues that because many of those who occupy top positions in the state come from ruling class backgrounds, they are therefore more likely to act in support of the ruling class interests. This is evident in society where the members of the House of Lords are not voted in, and rather born into their positions, resulting in a lack of real awareness about social issues leading them to act in favour of ruling classes. Miliband also argues that a central role of the state is to protect private property; this theory was seen in action during the recent Dale Farm evictions, where travellers were ruthlessly evicted from state owned property by law enforcement officers. However, Structuralist sociologists such as Poulantzas have criticised Miliband by arguing that it is not direct interference from the ruling class that makes the state serve ruling class interests, but the structure of society. Poulantzas argues that as part of the superstructure, the state will automatically act to favour the ruling class because the state has relative autonomy; while the state has some independence from individual members of the ruling class, the fact that it is shaped by the infrastructure forces the state to represent the interests of the capitalists. The state’s relative autonomy also allows it to make some concessions to the working class to defuse their protests and prevent an eventual revolution, and to promote the myth that it is acting in the interests of society as a whole. Miliband (1972) has since counter-criticised Poulantzas’ claims by arguing that his theory is not backed up empirical evidence. Furthermore, neo-Marxists suggest that concessions from the state can be more than a “token gesture”. Research by Westergaard (1995) supports the Modern Marxist views and suggests that the state managed by the labour governments has done very little to challenge inequality, and that the early 1990s saw increased inequality in Britain; the wealthiest 10% of the population now own 56% of all wealth in the country.

Join now!

Neo-Marxist views from Gramsci, however, challenge the elements of original Marxism. Gramsci argued against economic determinism (the theory that the economy determined other aspects of society) and instead stated that the superstructure could influence the economic infrastructure as well as vice versa. Gramsci’s theory suggests that the state is made up of political society (essentially the state) and civil society (the church, trade unions, mass media and political parties). Gramsci did not think of the state as a single institution but rather a dominant class in society; therefore, the ruling class (the state) needed to achieve hegemony to keep control ...

This is a preview of the whole essay