Art Theory

Karl Marx & Conflict Theory: Crash Course Sociology #6



CrashCourse

Today we’ll continue to explore sociology’s founding theorists with a look at Karl Marx and his idea of historical materialism. We’ll discuss modes of production, their development, and how they fit into Marx’s overall theory of historical development, along with class struggle and revolution. We’ll also discuss how Marx’s ideas gave rise to Gramsci’s idea of hegemony, and to conflict theories more generally.

Crash Course is made with Adobe Creative Cloud. Get a free trial here: https://www.adobe.com/creativecloud.html

***

Crash Course is on Patreon! You can support us directly by signing up at http://www.patreon.com/crashcourse

Thanks to the following Patrons for their generous monthly contributions that help keep Crash Course free for everyone forever:

Mark, Les Aker, Bob Kunz, William McGraw, Jeffrey Thompson, Ruth Perez, Jason A Saslow, Eric Prestemon, Malcolm Callis, Steve Marshall, Advait Shinde, Rachel Bright, Ian Dundore, Tim Curwick, Ken Penttinen, Dominic Dos Santos, Caleb Weeks, Kathrin Janßen, Nathan Taylor, Yana Leonor, Andrei Krishkevich, Brian Thomas Gossett, Chris Peters, Kathy & Tim Philip, Mayumi Maeda, Eric Kitchen, SR Foxley, Justin Zingsheim, Andrea Bareis, Moritz Schmidt, Bader AlGhamdi, Jessica Wode, Daniel Baulig, Jirat

Want to find Crash Course elsewhere on the internet?
Facebook – http://www.facebook.com/YouTubeCrashCourse
Twitter – http://www.twitter.com/TheCrashCourse
Tumblr – http://thecrashcourse.tumblr.com
Support Crash Course on Patreon: http://patreon.com/crashcourse

CC Kids: http://www.youtube.com/crashcoursekids

Source

Similar Posts

37 thoughts on “Karl Marx & Conflict Theory: Crash Course Sociology #6
  1. I hope Marxist have heard this before:
    1. If society is based primarilly on conflict, why did the revolution fail to occur? 
    2. What comprehensive, systematic evidence exists that your, or Marx's, human classifications are any more than personal, antidotal imaginations?
    2. If "labor" is due the "surplus" it creates, then how much should it pay back when the business suffers a loss? 
    3.If free enterprise results impoverishing "labor" how come it resulted in historic increase in prosperity and quality of life over the past 200 years?
    4. How come economic freedom so closely correlates to higher living standards even today, which can be measured by U.S. states or by countries?
    5. Why do you include hateful, defamatory caricatures of groups of people in a serious presentation? Do you really believe that the "bourgeoisie" people are bad and "labor" people are good?

  2. The selling of your labor depends upon the ownership of the mechanisms to make that labor productive. If you don't own the mechanisms to make you more productive then you can only earn what your labor produces. It is like renting a store…you can't say all that you make from that store is solely yours and you shouldn't have to pay rent. The renting of the store helps with keeping inventory together, provides a specific location in a specific address that your customers can easily find and rely on …so why shouldn't the owner of the property ask for rent even if you are supplying the store with goods, work hours etc. Same with companies…they provide the equipment, staff, supplies to make that business run and grow
    It is not dependent on your specific labor. You can be replaced by another employee and the business still survives. The beauty of capitalism is that you can buy your own store, equipment, supplies etc. and eventually compete with the same business that hired you. You can also pay for labor as your business grows putting you in the same position as the owners, CEO's etc.that you once worked for… Communism pays equally for labor no matter what's the quality…capitalism pays for quality labor and rewards labor and allows you to own and partake in the means of production.

  3. On if his mistakes: what about the smart people innovating? I don't think that the average worker is able to do that.

  4. funny. using critical theory to explain conflict theory. a circular reference of stupidity. way to go with the red blazer, very relatable to conservatives.

  5. Problem is old Karl had a great idea but the ideas were ALL wrong and misplaced. The ruling class would be even more powerful and no one would have free will or choice as to how they lived and worked. The system would be even more corrupt and no one would have incentive to be better. We would basically be robots and if we rejected the idea we would be jailed or killed and no one could protect us. Just look at Cuba, Russia, Venezuela, CHINA. The country is rich in resources but 95 percent of the population lives in poverty. Think the police are bad in the US? Try going to one of these countries. You might have a totally different outlook. That is if you happen to make it back at all.

  6. Where does anyone get the idea that people were equal in the Stone Age or at any other point in history? Marx’s arguments were always based in fantasy. Sociology itself is a school of fantasy, trying to be a science, but can’t even pull off being a philosophy.

  7. Musing about those who think it is silly or wrong to "fear" or "blame" Marx, as though the historical data hasn't shown what a complete disaster his ideology was from its beginning to this day. It is a seed that once planted, grows fast and sucks the nutrients from the soil, and when fully grown produces a harvest of fear and death in the perpetual struggle to gain and remain in power. Everyone thinks they would run the world better, and Marx is almost always the first step on the yellow brick road to Utopia, where everyone just does what you know is best for the world— once you and those who think just like you attain the power to enforce equality (though every bs ism knows deep down they really want to enforce privilege for themselves). Marx, a true Darwinist, dismissed God. Fine, but god-less Nietzsche was at least smart enough to point out that you can't just dismiss God and still hang onto morality. That little gap in reason hasn't stopped the Marxist revolutionaries from complaining, hating, demanding change and trying to gain power by any means necessary revolutions in order to move humanity in the right(?) direction. Interesting to see the historical evidence that those who did get to the seats of power had no problem with imposing strict standards and rules of thought, conduct and behavior that did not at all apply to themselves.

  8. Communism is EVIL….hegemony of ideas right there. It seems to me that some people don't even know why they think that proposition is true, they just FEEL it's true. I think that learning about different styles of government, economy, and social structures is valuable. Just my "two cents" heh.

  9. The ironic thing is Frederick Engels,Who is Marx’s little friend How the wealthy inheritance from his daddy. This is how marks stayed afloat by bumming off of his friend whose inheritance came from a dad that earned it in the free economy.

  10. I had to slow the video down. Damn she talks fast. If she could rap she would probably rap faster than Eminem. 😂😂
    Lmao.

  11. claiming what someone says and does is one thing…now if you think you know someones view or ¨what someone saw¨is just a guessing game, can be positive or negative depending on your own point of view. (if you want make someone look good or bad) … if … could have… maybe… marx saw marx thought marx believed are all opinions stated as if they are facts. more accurate would have been i believe marx saw/believed/thought etc..

  12. Average academicians worship pedestrian ideologies written by tools of the elite. Marx was a tool of the elite to destroy the Russian power structure. Many people died of starvation after the surface level, low IQ writings of Marx were set in motion. I'm sure the creators of this site are too low of IQ to debate me on this and will just delete my comments.

  13. Can I just say, well done to Crash Course. As someone who has read the Communist Manifesto she was spot on and did it in a way she didn't sugar coat or over exaggerate anything
    However,
    she did not get into it in this video but the causes for revolution and how rich keep there power is Marx biggest misconceptions
    1) going to advanced communism Marx wants us to live together, in one state (no countries) and everyone does what they love, get equal pay, housing provided by gov't and we vote (democracy). yet, if you have read other philosophers you would know this would not work. Same working class Marx calls for revolution is same Plato would call as the ones shouldn't be in power because they do not know anything, are dumb, and easily corrupted which is what we see with a lot of people in congress and same people who rioted for toilet paper during covid outbreak. The poor always want the power but they do not know what to do with it, let alone how to keep and redistribute it.
    2) redistribution of wealth. After you kill the rich you give the money back to others. Yet, Machiavelli would say that would not happen. People are selfish, evil, and only good when they are forced to be (even Nozick and other philosophers back this up, I bring up Nozick bec he encouraged to be selfish). Look at what happen during covid or any crisis, everyone for themselves. Or china after the workers revolted. Mao kept all the power for him and his party and convinced the people it is only a matter of time before we give it back to the people an same propaganda to keep power. While Marx says this must happen in a capitalist state, it does beg the question that when workers take over, power is quickly stole by one or a group.
    3) Lets look at the free market. bailing out the banks, air line, cruise ships is not capitalism. The free market would let them fail because they did not prepare for struggle, but that is not the case. Govt bailed them out, govt involvement is socialism. In addition, profit is not bad. If I sell one of you guys a phone that I made and took time, I should keep the reward for making and selling. If i then take out a loan and start a business and somehow survive (even tho most business fail 85-90 percent) than I should be able to pay the workers for me a price floor wage/living wage/ min. wage depending on that state im in and reap the benefits bec it was my hard work, risk, and business moves to get to where it went. Unless you think it is okay to steal and what i mean is, you get a pay check, pay your bills and whatever you have left over after uncle sam comes, i take and give it to myself because I need it more, most would say that isnt right.
    I would love to live in a advanced communist state but Marx was very much optimistic of people (working class) and targeted the poor to rise up and take what is not theres. theres many ways to get rich in a capitalist state and many ways to get poor. educate your self
    because I can see why many college kids and poor people fall for Marx ideas. It is easy to take whats not yours, and hard to become self made.

Comments are closed.

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com