Classes Without Labor

Three Critiques of Bourdieu

Bibliographic Data

ID2371075
AuthorsJosh Seim (0000-0002-4503-1228, Boston College, corresponding author), Michael A Mccarthy (0000-0003-1039-7980, Marquette University)
Year2023
Publication date2023-09-25
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueCritical Sociology (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0896-9205 • E-ISSN: 1569-1632
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/08969205231200898
OpenAlexW4387018702
LanguageEN
Citations received5
References cited36

This article offers three interrelated critiques of Bourdieusian class analysis. First, Bourdieu replaces classes on paper with capitals on paper. He offers a false break from Marx in an effort to make capital more 'relational' via a theory of social space, but in doing so he neglects capital's fundamental relation to labor. Second, Bourdieu offers a theory of domination without exploitation. Bourdieu's classes live against one another, but it remains unclear how some classes might also live off of others. Third, and as a consequence of the first two missteps, he emphasizes position over production. Bourdieu typically sees 'production' as a form of 'position-taking' and as something best examined toward the top of social hierarchies. By largely ignoring labor and exploitation, he generates a theory of positions at the expense of a theory of production

Class analysis · Cultural capital · Economics · Epistemology · Habitus · Microeconomics · Neoclassical economics · Political science · Politics · Positive economics · Relations of production · Social capital · Social relation · Social science · Social theory · Sociology · Law · Migration, Ethnicity, and Economy · Social and Cultural Dynamics · Social Capital and Networks

Tools

Open DOI