marxism and the family Flashcards
view of the family
Marxists do not regard the nuclear as a functionally necessary (and therefore universal) institution (unlike functionalists). Marxists see the family within the framework of a capitalist society, which is based on private property, driven by profit and riddled with conflict between social classes with opposing interests.
For Marxists, the main functions of the nuclear family in a capitalist society are to:
socially control its members by teaching children to submit to the capitalist, ruling class
reproduce unequal class relationships e.g. via ruling class family networks
dampen down inevitable social conflict e.g. by discouraging workers from losing wages by going on strike
The family is a core market for the consumption of the commodities (goods and services) produced by capitalist companies and is therefore a key source of its profits –
Adverts are targeted at families, encouraging them to ‘keep up with the Joneses’
The media target children who use ‘pester power’ to persuade parents to spend more
Children who lack the latest fashion or ‘must have’ gadgets are mocked and stigmatised by their peers
The need to financially support family members also discourages a proletariat revolution – since workers are too busy earning the money needed for their families to survive
engels view on the family
Engels, along with other traditional Marxists, believed that the monogamous nuclear family developed as a means of passing on private property to heirs. The family, coupled with monogamy, was an ideal mechanism as it provided proof of paternity (who the father was) and so property could be passed on to the right people.
Women’s position in this monogamous nuclear family was not much different from that of prostitutes in that a financial deal was struck – she provided sex and heirs in return for the economic security her husband offered.
Women can only achieve liberation (freedom) from patriarchal control with the overthrow of capitalism. A classless society with no private property will no longer require a monogamous, patriarchal nuclear family.
evaluation of engles
Why might this be regarded as an old fashioned and outdated view?
Some might argue that a monogamous family also benefits women. Explain how?
How common is the patriarchal (traditional) nuclear family today?
What is the main pattern of relationships today – do we marry for life or are we serial monogamists?
zaretsky, primary socialisation and power over children
especially paternal power (‘age-patriarchy’) gets children used to the idea that there is always ‘someone in charge’. This prepares children for a working life in a capitalist society in which they will accept orders from their capitalist employers.
zaretsky, buffer zone
The illusion of a haven (’buffer zone’) from the harsh exploitation workers experience at work. At home, family members can ‘be themselves’ and have a ‘private life’ away from the alienation of capitalism. However, Zaretsky argues that this ‘family haven’ is an ideological illusion which doesn’t exist in reality. It is dependent on the domestic exploitation of women – wives, mothers, daughters - who perform a ‘labour of love’ within the family at no cost to capitalists. The unpaid domestic labour of housewives ensures that capitalism gets a continuous supply of future generations of workers for free!
zaretsky, unit of consumption
In addition, families play a major role in generating profits for capitalists because they are an important market for the sale of consumer goods. Marxists argue that capitalism exploits the labour of workers, making a profit by selling the products of their labour back to them for more than it pays workers to produce these commodities e.g.
Adverts urge families to ‘keep up with the Joneses’ to consume all the latest products.
The media target children, who use ‘pester power’ to persuade parents to spend more.
althusser, ideological state apparatus
Althusser argued that in order for capitalism to survive, the working class must submit to the ruling class or bourgeoisie. He suggested that the family is one of the ideological state apparatuses (along with others such as education and the media) which are concerned with social control and passing on the ideology (ideas and beliefs) of the ruling class.
Through socialisation into this ideology in the family (e.g. as described by Zaretsky above), the ruling class tries to maintain false class consciousness by winning the hearts and minds of the working class into accepting capitalism as a fair and just system:
As part of the superstructure of society, the family has an ideological function to reflect and reinforce the economic needs of the capitalist infrastructure.
Society’s superstructure is controlled by the bourgeoisie and used to create values, attitudes, beliefs and practices which support the ruling class (false class consciousness)
donzelot, controlling the working class famalies
Although not a Marxist, Donzelot is interested in how the state controls working class families. Unlike Althusser, who argues that state control of families is ideological (and therefore indirect), Donzelot identifies state policies and professionals associated with the state (doctors, social workers, teachers, health visitors and so on) as policing families directly in order to control and change them. Poor families in particular are likely to be targeted by professionals since they are identified as the cause of crime and anti-social behaviour. Such families are seen by the state as ‘problem families’ requiring ‘improvement’.
Using the professionals listed above, provide an example of the state policing the family.
evaluation of donzelot
Marxists and feminists criticise Donzelot for failing to identify clearly who benefits from policing the family – why are poor families particular targeted? Marxists argue that family policies and professionals generally operate in the interests of capitalism, while feminists argue that men are the main beneficiaries.
