Marxist Theory Of Poverty

INTRODUCTION

This essay will discuss the concept of one of the greatest economists, a philosopher, a journalist, a historian, also known and believed to be one of the founding fathers of sociology. Karl Marx, made a contribution to sociology in the 19th century. He developed a sociological theory that stated that human societies progress through a struggle between two distinct classes, namely; the bourgeoise and proletariat. It claims that society is in conflict between the rich who own and control everything, and the poor who must work for the rich and be rewarded very little for their hard work. The theory is known as the conflict theory or the Marxist theory or Marxism, which is more concerned about the class struggle within the society,

Inequality still persists in most societies, mostly in the third world countries were both gender inequality and income inequality continue to be socially problematic for most societies. Gender discrimination and the income gap continue to grow. Furthermore, poverty also does continue to be socially problematic. People in many societies, mostly the Southern countries continue to live under appalling conditions, without any of the three necessities, the basic human needs such as shelter, food and water. According to Aristotle, the ultimate goal is to strive for happiness and the difference is found among ends. “Happiness depends on ourselves” and he continued to say “happiness is a central purpose of human life and a goal in itself” (Ackrill,1981; Mortimer, 1978). In other words, this means that in cases such as the poverty stricken societies or countries, people should strive for happiness with the little things they have in life and continue to stay in hope. They appreciate the little they have in hope that it will get

Smith (2010) argues that while ‘poverty’ and ‘economic inequality’ are closely related terms, they refer to ‘distinct and different concepts’. The scope of this review precludes detailed definitions of poverty (e.g. as provided elsewhere, Goulden and D’Arcy, 2014), or debates about how poverty might best be measured. Instead, it offers a brief description of how these two concepts might be defined and how they differ. Poverty is a term that concentrates on those who have the least money or other resources or, as Ridge and Wright (2008) argue, it is ‘a situation of extreme disadvantage experienced at the bottom of the social and economic scale’. Yet poverty is more than being at the bottom of the income scale; it describes individuals and families who have inadequate resources to secure what is deemed a reasonable, or expected, standard of living within a given country. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) working definition of poverty is: ‘When a person’s resources (mainly their material resources) are not sufficient to meet their minimum needs (including social participation)’ (Goulden and D’Arcy,