A Story of Three Progressives

A Story of triplet Progressives Three var.ic theorists, Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim, and ooze Weber fool discussed and analyzed the complexness of newisation. Modernization is a broad plan that refers to major amicable changes which emit when a pre-industrial fiat develops economically and the workplace shifts from the home to the factory (industrialization), mess move from farms into cities where jobs ar available (urbanization), and large-scale formal electronic organizations emerge (bureaucratization). exclusively of these sociologists energize developed major theoretical and methodological statements on the event of modernization and m either of their theories that were made a century or ii ago console hold true today. Beginning with Karl Marx, an extreme revolutionary of the 19th century, he argued that modernization is an ascendancy of industrial capitalist economy. His idea of modernness was shaped by three developments in history the French revolutions of 17 89 and 1848, the industrial and agricultural revolutions in Britain, and the collapse of the churchs intellectual credibility.Despite living his biography when more(prenominal) or less of Europe was still agricultural and artisanal most European states were still dominated by monarchical power and most Europeans still went to church, Marx unsounded industrial press and some of its future effects. Marx depicts modernization as a capitalist edict working as a administration, in which all(prenominal) group or singular works to fulfill the need of another. As soon as an individual enters a capitalist union, he is affableise into a certain role or behavior which fulfills the needs of that society (role meaning either a alternate union movement or a capitalist).For instance, if an individual is a proletariat he must work for a capitalist to satisfy the needs of the society. (cite communist manifesto somewhere). This instalment between the proletarians and the capitalists be enforced for the benefit of the owners so that they can exploit the working class for their own means, but the working class does not resist be practise this system has be experience normalized. The two classes work as a team and d one and only(a) a hierarchy create a harvest-homeive society. Overall, Marx ciphers of modernization as a land where individuals curse on each(prenominal) other to function, and each individual is assigned a role.Next, Emile Durkheim stressed that modernization involves an increased division of labor ( speciated economic activity), and a shift from mechanised to constitutional solidarity. This academician discusses division of labor as a necessary tool for a productive society, but it is also a natural occurrence. Durkheim proceeds from the concept that the division is an thoroughgoing outgrowth of a society in which dis homogeneous batch have different matter tos and skills. Therefore, a society in which individuals specialize in producin g a good or service leave alone be more efficient than a society that is generalized.Durkheims view of modernization explains that iindividuals no long-dated perform the same tasks, have the same interests, nor necessarily sh are the same perspectives on life. But, Durkheim makes it clear that this does not cause a society to fail or disintegrate, or else natural solidarity is formed. Similar to the organs within a body, individuals perform certain specific functions, but rely on the well- world and successful performance of other individuals. If one organ fails, the rest of them fail as well. A body, or in this scale a society, cannot function at all if one part crumbles.This combine upon each other for social (and even physical) survival is the source of organic solidarity and the modern worlds interdependency in a society. Lastly, Max Weber analyzed modernization as the replacement of tradition with rationality. He snarl that society comport become more complicated, spe cialized, professionalized, and stratified in the modern world. Prayer and religion will no longer be aspects that fix and/or help solve problems. Science will be the rational fashion of thought and will be the dominate way of finding a solution.Specialization will result in professionalism, which in turn will bring more order to the modern world as every segment of every job will have a specialist. In general, modernization to Weber meant society will be controlled by managers and experts, and rationality will dictate the way of life. from each one of these theorists have strong opinions on modernization and developed what they believe will be the effects of it in the future. Between Marx, Durkheim, and Weber, various theoretical arguments have been made, each being extremely progressive thoughts for the time period they lived in.Karl Marx thinks modernization get outs to both good and bad payoffs. One outcome modernization leads to is derangement. Marx believed that alienatio n is a systematic result of capitalist economy, in which both the capitalist and proletariat become isolated. This theory is based upon his observation that, in emerging industrial output signal, under capitalist economy, workers inevitably lose control of their lives and selves in not having any control of their work. Thus, workers never become autonomous, self-realized forgiving beings beings in any important sense. Karl Marx attributes four showcases of alienation in labor under capitalism.The head start part is when the worker becomes modify from his own human potential. The workplace is no longer a place of fulfillment, but instead where the worker feels the least human and the least like himself. Ultimately, the worker becomes a machine that is controlled. The next type of alienation occurs between workers. This happens because capitalism reduces labor to a commodity to be traded on the market, rather than a true social relationship. Even if a worker is side by side an other worker, he is unbelievable to communicate with him due to the nature of capitalism (e. . an assembly line development technology does not allow one to speak with a friend worker). Thirdly, the worker becomes alienated from the product itself. This occurs because the capitalist class controls the worker and in turn owns the product. In fact, a worker must buy the product he makes for the same price as anyone else. Lastly, a worker becomes alienated from the entire production process. This means that the actual work becomes mindless, meaningless, and more than promising offers little or no intrinsic satisfactions.Similarly, a worker who performs a very specialized task whitethorn not even receipt what the final product will be. Another outcome Marx believes modernization leads to is social stratification. Social stratification means that working class tribe are not likely to advance socioeconomically, while the wealthy volume may continue to exploit the proletariat genera tion after generation. Marx identified that the social classes are stratified based on their connection to the means of production and therefore the ruling class, bourgeoisie, and proletarians, maintain their social positions by maintaining their elationship with the means of production. This support of status quo is achieved by various methods of social control employed by the bourgeoisie within many aspects of social life (e. g. religion). Marx also powerfully believed modernization would cause products and/or commodities to have exchange value. This meant that instead of products being used immediately, they would be exchanged in the market for money or other objects. This use value is connected to the relationship between human needs and tangible objects that can satisfy those needs.For instance, shoes have the excogitation of protecting ones feet and bread has the use value of satisfying hunger. If an individual chooses to trade one of these objects for the other than he has given each an exchange value. accord to Marx, the various exchange values of commodities reflect the various amounts of labor, measured in time, that their production requires. Commodities and their use value lead to Marxs idea on the fetishism of commodities. This is when the commodity takes on its own form.This can be something an individual produces or even ones own labor. Ones own labor can even become a commodity, as it bought and sold and therefore requires an exchange value. This idea also relates to alienation mentioned above. A workers labor is used by the capitalist to make the objects that ultimately come to dominate the workers. Hence, commodities are the source of alienation because workers produce for the sake of others instead of for their own purposes and needs. Similarly, the fetishism of commodities can be interpreted into the concept of reification. depersonalisation disorder is the process of coming to believe that humanly created social forms are natural, univ ersal, and strong things. This implies that people believe that social structures are beyond their control and unchangeable. Marx believed capitalism would cause reification to occur and create a self-fulfilling prophecy in which structures actually do become the character others believe they are. This concept demonstrates that capitalism will not only lead to objects given value, but people as well. Marx also feels that modernization leads to wants becoming needs, and needs reating more needs. In other words, the satisfaction of ones needs can lead to the creation of new needs. Ritzers example for this is how the production of cars satisfied the need for long distance travel, but led to a new need for highways. Also, at one time people did not feel they needed cars when the car was first invented, but nowadays most people feel they need them. Therefore, Marx reason that labor occurs in response to needs, but the labor itself transforms needs, which can lead to new forms of produc tive activity.One final thought Karl Marx thought capitalism would create was a proletariat revolution. Because the capitalist exploit the workers, Marx believed that sooner or later the proletarians would fight back. As capitalism progresses more and more people become workers, and less people become capitalists. Marx thought that with change magnitude meter of workers, more resistance to exploitation and oppression would occur, ultimately leading to a confrontation and revolution. Despite these thoughts, Marx felt that capitalism was a step in the right direction.The birth of capitalism opened up new possibilities for independence of workers and provides possibility for freedom from the traditions from previous societies (pre capitalism). Though, Marx was an advocate of Communism and believed this was the answer to a change in mode of production. Next, Emile Durkheim has theories on the effects of modernization as well. First, Durkheim believes modernization leads to energetic density. Over time, societies go through a regeneration from being more primitive/mechanical, to being more modern/organic the difference lying in the source of their solidarity, or what holds them together (Ritzer, 2007).The cause of this transition is an increase in dynamic density. One may think the solution to this problem is to have a growing or increasing existence, but this is not sufficient enough to create change in the division of labor. The reason for this is that individuals and small groups of people can live in relative isolation from one another and still perform most of the tasks necessary for survival themselves, no matter how big the overall population gets (Ritzer, 2007).Therefore, a growing population must also increase the absolute frequency with which people interact within and between social groups. This increase in dynamic density is likely to cause a division of labor and the transformation of social solidarity. As mentioned above, Durkheim developed tw o terms mechanical and organic solidarity. A society characterized by mechanical solidarity means a unified one in which every person is a generalist. This society is held together because each individual is engaged in a similar activity as the another, and can therefore relate with each other.Contrasting, organic solidarity is held together by the differences among people and the fact that each individual has a different job or task. Durkheim believed that modern society was one in which there are a narrow range of tasks and many people must work in order to survive. Therefore, modern society is held together by the specialization of people and their need for the services of many others. Unfortunately, concord to Durkheim, this means that modern societies have weaker shared understandings, norms, and beliefs than primitive ones, but are more likely to be cohesive from the division of labor.Along with dynamic density, Durkheim was concerned about the moral healthof modern society. He felt that morality was connected with society and therefore society could not be immoral, but it could possibly lose its moral force if the collective interest of society became nothing but self-interests of individuals. Durkheim also felt that people were in risk of a pathological loosening of moral bonds (Ritzer, 2007). Without this, people would be in search of more and more gratification, leading to more and more needs.Every human being will want more and society will start to not limit these needs. Durkheim called this the insatiable desire that modernization would endure. In summary, Durkheim debates in The Division of Labor that moral solidarity has changed in modern society and that modern society allows for more interdependence and closer, less free-enterprise(a) relations. Lastly, Max Weber thinks modernization leads to a variety of outcomes. The first outcome of modernization is bureaucracy.