Classes Without Labor: Three Critiques of Bourdieu

Authors

Michael A. McCarthy, Marquette UniversityFollow
Josh Seim, Boston College

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

2023

Publisher

SAGE

Source Publication

Critical Sociology

Source ISSN

0896-9205

Original Item ID

DOI: 10.1177/08969205231200898

Abstract

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.

Comments

Accepted version. Critical Sociology, (2023). Online before print. DOI. © SAGE Publications. Used with permission.

Recommended Citation

McCarthy, Michael A. and Seim, Josh, "Classes Without Labor: Three Critiques of Bourdieu" (2023). Social and Cultural Sciences Faculty Research and Publications. 359.
https://epublications.marquette.edu/socs_fac/359