This essay will aim to explain the main differences between Marxian, Durkheimian, and Weberian approaches to social inequality. It will begin with each Marx's approach to social inequality, which he believed economic factors to be the sole cause of this social phenomenon. Marx was born in the aftermath of the French revolution where the governing elite was overthrown by the bourgeoisie allowing capitalism to develop. This in turn gave rise to a new class where Marx put all his hope in. However, Marx envisaged an inevitable class conflict and an overthrow of the capitalist elite, but that still has not occurred. Next the essay will discuss Weber's approach to social inequality. Weber had the advantage of writing at a later period than Marx. He took into account more than just economic factors such as social status and parties as opposed to Marx, which allows for a more in depth explanation of social inequality. Then the essay will discuss Durkheims approach to social inequality. Durkheim also had the advantage of writing at a later period. He used the Division of Labour in Society to explain social inequality. His idea was that as society became more complex, the tasks in it became more specialised with unequal rewards as motivation for doing these tasks thus making society more and more stratified. Finally in the conclusion the essay will discuss the main differences between each of their approaches to social inequality.
.
Social inequality did not exist in mans "natural" state because of the common control of resources allegedly characterised by the ownership of land by the total community with individual rights in tools, cultivation and the distribution of products. Those who laboured owned the land they laboured on, the requisite tools, their own labour power and had the rights in common over the distribution of the products. When any of these factors was altered so that only a few in society owned the land, inequality was born (Owen: 20).