Families and Households - Marxism Flashcards
What is Marxism?
A conflict theory that sees modern capitalist society as divided into two classes - the capitalist class and the working class. Marxists view all social institutions in this capitalist society as contributing to the maintenance of exploitation.
The family is viewed as an oppressive institution that performs several important functions for capitalism.
The functions of family according to Marxism
- Passing on wealth;
As private property becomes more important, men who control it need to ensure they can pass it on to their own sons, leading to monogamous marriage, which also meant that women became the private property of their husband, who controlled her sexuality to ensure he was the father of her children - Domestic labour;
Unpaid domestic labour of housewives supports the future generations of workers at no cost to capitalist employers - Unit of consumption;
Capitalism needs consumers to buy its products - the family is an important market for consumer goods, allowing capitalism to make profits
What do Marxists argue about the family?
Marxist sociologists argue that society’s institutions help to maintain class inequality and capitalism.
What are the 3 functions of families according to Marxists?
- Inheritance of Wealth
- Unit of consumption
- Ideological function
Inheritance of Wealth - Friedrich Engels
- Primitive society – hunter-gathering society, people worked for themselves. He claims there was no such thing as family in this society. Engels argued there was the ‘promiscuous horde’ or tribe where there was no restrictions of sexual relationships.
- Society developed, wealth increased and so did the development of private property. This change brought about the patriarchal monogamous nuclear family
- Monogamy became essential to ensure that fathers knew who their kin were and who was going to take over their property.
- Women became the property of men and their role became to produce children
Ideological function
- The family socialises a set of ideas and beliefs which justify inequality and maintain the capitalist system.
- The ideas persuade people to accept capitalism as fair, natural and unchangeable
- Parents teach children to buy goods, work for someone else, gain qualifications which the capitalist system requires, follow rules and prepare them for working life.
Unit of consumption
- Capitalism exploits workers for their surplus value. Making a profit by selling the products of their labour for more than it pays them to produce these commodities. Family generates the profit for those who own the mode of production.
- Advertisers urge families to ‘keep up with the Joneses’ by consuming all latest products.
- Media target children - ‘pestering power’
- Children who don’t have the ‘must haves’ are stigmatised and mocked by peers.
Comparison of Marx. and Func. theories of family
F - Socialisation of children is a positive thing.
M - No, it is a means of passing on capitalist ideology and this is not positive for all. It restricts freedom of expression and choice
F - The family provides a warm bath for its members
M - Not for all - there is a dark side where women are exploited for the free labour they provide and children are abused
F - Family controls / stabilises adult personalities
M - The man is stabilised but not to provide better for the family but to be a better more efficient worker. More about oppression.
F - The family works as a part of the whole society and keeps society stable.
M - No, the family is there simply to serve the economy and support the ruling class / owners of production. They are a means to an end rather than celebrated in themselves.
Friedrich Engels - Detailed
‘The Origins of Family’ - 1972
- More evolutionary perspective, tracing family changes into modes of production
- Stage 1 - the promiscuous horde; no sexual rules, no family, and all property was owned in common
- Stage 2 - polygamy; emergence of private property creates smaller family units but men were allowed more than one wife, so women’s sexual behaviour was more regulated to ensure legitimate heirs for the wealth of the father
- Stage 3 - monogamy; one wife, more control to make sure there is legitimate heir, and prevents the dilution of wealth
- Stage 4 (future prediction) - Communism; private property won’t exist, no need for family, society will act as one, and children are raised in common
- The ruling class developed the nuclear family to protect the wealth more effectively and maintain the bourgeoisie, but there is little historical evidence for these ideas
- Family is about proof of parentage, bloodlines / lineage, and relations are clear contracts of inheritance and primogeniture (first born gets money)
- Stratified diffusion - keep the concentration of money high, which is achieved through small families
Evaluating Engels
- Feminist critics - ignores the role of women and children as being influenced solely by economics - patriarchal control is not included
- Little historical evidence for first step (Lewis Henry Morgan identified monogamy and nuclear families existed before the time Engels said they did)
- Infidelity exists and paternity can therefore be uncertain despite monogamy
- However, a strength of his theories are that they have a sound basis, as means of production shared in families will result in larger family units whereas when private ownership emerges for means of production, family units shrink
Louis Althusser
- Ideological state apparatus of family - controls the working class through social institutions
- Family socialises children into acceptable behaviours
Evaluation -
- Only theoretical basis, no empirical evidence
- Ignores the subculture values of different family types, and so families may not be as influenced by the behaviour of the elites
- Ignores the meanings people assign to their own actions - individual interpretations of norms and values - too deterministic
Eli Zaretsky (1976)
- Challenged Func. view of Parsons - he stated that the nuclear family mainly benefits capitalism and the ruling class at the expense of others in society
- He suggested a variation of Parsons’ warm bath theory - he argued that family life gave more proletarian men something to control and a space to be the ‘boss’, providing a capitalist function by providing a way to train tolerance of powerlessness and frustration
- They could deal with this exploitation at work as they had a private domain of being able to take out stress and frustration - women are ‘takers of shit’ (Fran Ansley Marxist-Feminist)
- Sees family as a conservative institution that preserves capitalism by weakening workers in relation to their boss - if pay or treatment is unfair, the worker is able to leave for better conditions or strike, but they are more reluctant to do this as they have to take their family into account, making doing these things a much more difficult decision
- This makes a more complacent workforce, benefitting the boss by quelling rebellion
Classic texts - Zaretsky
- Contrasts Parsons’ as there is an illusion that the family is a private space separate from economics and capitalism
- The family has a psychological function and a ‘cushioning effect’ - it cushions the damage capitalism does and meets individual needs and nurturing the exploited workers
- He argues the main blockage to the communist rebellion favoured by Traditional Marxists is family
- He agrees with Parsons on what the family does, but argues that this is a negative not a positive and upholds capitalism by performing the free labour domestically and emotional to maintain the proletariat’s false class consciousness
- Women work for capitalism by reproducing the next generation of workers and caring for existing ones
- However, for Zaretsky, this psychological function can only really be truly performed in Parsons’ way when capitalism ends
Illustrating Zaretsky’s theory
1) Family is a crucial agent of socialisation of children.
Children are taught to be compliant, obedient and respectful to authority which prepares them for life as a passive worker cog in the capitalist machine.
Therefore the family is partially responsible for the suppression of ideas which could challenge capitalism.
2) Criticism of Parsons’ ‘stabilisation of adult personalities’ argument.
Zaretsky says the family is more sinister.
Family offers a pressure valve release to frustrated, tired workers. Workers cope with oppression and exploitation as they won’t risk their families by losing their job.
Ford motors in 1980’s mainly employed married fathers - less likely to strike!
The cushioning effect (cf with warm bath).
3) Nuclear family is an essential component of capitalism because it is a unit of consumption.
Families buying goods and services fuel the capitalist economy.
The pursuit of ‘stuff’ has also distracted workers from their exploited position.
We are fixated on designer labels and ignore our inequality.
Zaretsky’s Evaluation
Outdated theories - assumes worker is male and that there are no dual-earning households as well as ignoring the benefits family members receive from being in a family unit - it is not just for economical reasons
