Comparing Durkheim And Marx's Social Conflict Theory

In 2014, thousands of fast food workers across the nation put pressure on the government to pass legislation to increase the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour. Making an average of $7 hourly, most were far below the poverty line and complained about their inability to maintain basic life necessities despite working a considerable amount of hours each week. Many felt the multi-billion dollar corporations they worked for and the CEO’s who were in charge were exploiting them while pocketing the majority of the wealth they helped to create. However, some business owners and outside employees, mostly those who worked in white-collar jobs, disagreed stating that these workers did not deserve a higher wage for a job that required no degree or special

Both thinkers offer substantial critical analysis into the understanding of labor, social stratification and economic systems and their relation to personal identity and behavior, as well as social norms and institutions, which contribute to how a society functions. However, each took a different approach with Durkheim using a functionalist lens while Marx utilized his social conflict theory. Despite their differences, each model helps to recognize how the division of labor shapes society and what the dispute over the federal minimum wage can say about America. Marx’s conflict theory provides a compelling argument into understanding class division and economic antagonisms, but Durkheim’s methodology uncovers a more comprehensive and persuasive claim to understanding societal norms and institutions, which offers concrete analysis into structuralism and the complexities of

In his book, The Division of Labor in Society, Durkheim states, “To ask what the function of the division of labor is, is to seek for the need which it supplies.” Durkheim recognized that society symbolized an organism with various organs that played a fundamental role in its overall function. And like each organ, the social structures and cultural standards that make up the society, carry out special functions and duties to ensure that society runs efficiently. He identified these as social facts, which are removed from personal materializations, but universally acceptable, external restrictions that support the various societal needs that include economic, educational, religious and family institutions. For example, a church, which is a vital support system in many communities, is exempt from paying federal property taxes. As a result, this allows many churches to offer numerous social programs and ministries that support residents, but also positions the church as a conduit for influencing and educating individuals about societal norms and behaviors, which are considered acceptable. These individuals are eventually expected to become productive members of society that will continue to spread these same beliefs and use them as a blueprint for others to follow. Eventually, this trade off allows the church, like many institutions within a society, to serve a specific