Weber and Marx are both recognized experts whose opinions on capitalism are studied by scholars. Weber saw capitalism primarily through cultural and social lenses, and he thought that Western capitalism was founded on religion, specifically Protestantism. Marx, however, viewed capitalism as an economic tool. According to the concept, capitalism exacerbates social inequality.
Despite the different approaches, there was a consensus between these two viewpoints because Marx stated that capitalism considers all human relationships to be monetary in nature. It considers morality and passion to be unnecessary. Similar themes may be found in Weber’s Spirit of Capitalism. Moreover, Weber was a supporter of Marxism, which means that he agreed with some of Marx’s premises. He was a liberal Calvinist who committed his life to Marxist study and analysis. He was also a key player in the evolution of structural functionalism.
The disagreement on the nature of the class lies at the heart of the Marx-Weber argument. Marx saw class conflict as the primary driver of societal development. On the other hand, Weber states that the disparity in life chances is defined by social stratification. As a result, it is evident that there are a number of basic discrepancies between Marx’s and Weber’s notions about class. Weber argues that factors other than property ownership and non-ownership can impact the creation of classes.
Furthermore, Weber argues that there is little evidence to support Marx’s view of class polarization as a fundamental characteristic of class structure. Another distinction is that, unlike Marx, Weber does not believe that a proletariat revolution is unavoidable and that workers will express class discontent in less spectacular ways. Finally, Weber rejects the idea that political power is inextricably linked to economic power.
Essentially, the difference between Marx’s and Weber’s views appears to be in the fact that Marx perceives capitalism as something that has changed the way of thinking and affected the way society cooperates. Weber, on the other hand, believed that Protestantism allowed the followers of this religion to see new ways of thinking and therefore led to the popularization of capitalism and its widespread adoption. Marx’s approach to capitalism appears to be more appropriate.
The basis of Webber’s opinion is that religion was the catalyst of capitalist development. However, capitalism has existed within other nations with religions different from Protestantism. Hence, other factors must have had an effect on the development of capitalism. Hence, it appears that, in a broader sense, the values of the society determine the economic values that become prevalent within this society.
Moreover, the first economic systems were based on the practice of bartering, which was a form of exchanging goods between individuals. This system was not based on a religious belief and was based merely on the values of the individuals and their need to obtain certain items.
Using the example of the United States, once the values of American society changed, the transformation of the economic system followed. For example, the state’s transition from slavery, which was a result of the change of values and views on the exploitation of unpaid labor, has forced the enterprises and individuals who used slaves’ labor to change their approaches to business and lead their operations.
Hence, both Weber’s and Marx’s approaches to capitalism offer a valid explanation of the economic systems and their relationships with social values. However, Marx’s approach explains the modern-day economic system more effectively, showing the relationship between class, social values, and capitalism.