American Sociological Review, vol. 42, núm. 1, 1977, pp. 32-55. Marxist Class Categories and Income Inequality. Wright, Erik Olin y Perrone, Lucas. Cita: Wright, Erik Olin y Perrone, Lucas (1977). Marxist Class Categories and Income Inequality. American Sociological Review, 42 (1) 32-55. Dirección estable: https://www.aacademica.org/erik.olin.wright/42 Acta Académica es un proyecto académico sin fines de lucro enmarcado en la iniciativa de acceso abierto. Acta Académica fue creado para facilitar a investigadores de todo el mundo el compartir su producción académica. Para crear un perfil gratuitamente o acceder a otros trabajos visite: http://www.aacademica.org. 32 AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW Sutherland,Edwin H. and Donald Cressey Westley, William A. 1974 Criminology. Philadelphia: Lippincott. 1953 "Violence and the police." American Swigert, Victoria Lynn and Ronald A. Farrell Journal of Sociology 59:34-41. 1976 Murder, Inequality and the Law: Dif- Wolf, Edwin D. ferential Treatment in the Legal Pro- 1964 Abstract of "Analysis of jury sentencing cess. Lexington, Ma.: Heath. in capital cases: New Jersey: 1937- 1961." Rutgers Law Review 19:56-64. Treiman, Donald Wolfgang, Marvin E. Forth- Occupational Prestige in Comparative 1961 "A sociological analysis of criminal coming Perspective. New York: Seminar. homicide." Federal Probation 23:48- Vines, Kenneth and Herbert Jacob 55. 1963 "Studies in judicial politics." in VIII Wolfgang, Marvin E. and Franco Ferracuti Tulane Studies in Political Science: 77- 1967 The Subculture of Violence. London: 98. Methaen. MARXIST CLASS CATEGORIES AND INCOME INEQUALITY * ERIK OLIN WRIGHT University of Wisconsin,Madison LUCA PERRONE Universitydegli Studi delta Calabria,Italy UniversityStatale di Milano, Italy American Sociological Review 1977, Vol. 42 (February):32-55 Marxian class categories have been almost totally ignored in systematic quantitative studies of social stratification and income inequality. Occupational status or a similar variable is almost always used as the core criterion defining the individual's position in the system of stratification. This study provides a preliminary operationalization of the Marxian class categories for use in quantitative research. The three most important of these classes-workers, managers and employers-then are analyzed to see what inter- actions occur between class position and the usual variables used in predicting income (education, occupational status, age and job tenure) and between class and race-sex cate- gories. It was found that there is a substanial interaction between class position and the income returns to education; within class categories, however, there are no differences between race and sex groups in the returns to education. In the study of social stratification, there causes and consequences of inequality is a major disjuncture between theoretical have almost totally ignored Marxian cate- traditions and quantitative empirical work. gories. Marxists have been suspicious of Of all the theoretical traditions in sociol- quantitative, multivariate approaches to the ogy, social inequality probably plays the study of social reality, and the practitioners most central role in the Marxist perspec- of multivariate statistics generally have tive. Yet, quantitative investigations of the viewed the Marxist perspective as offering little of interest for empirical research. The present research is an attempt to * We would like to express our gratitude to bridge this gap between the Marxist theo- Robert Quinn, Graham Staines, Linda Shepherd retical perspective and the rapidly growing and others at the University of Michigan Survey body of quantitative studies of social in- Research Center for their assistance throughout this study. We would also like to thank Tom equality. The first part of the paper will Rothenberg,Arthur Stinchcombe, BarbaraHeyns, discuss briefly the logic of the Marxist con- Robert Kahn and Marcia Wright for their many cept of class and present a preliminary op- helpful suggestions on various portions of the perationalization of the Marxist criteria for work, and Sam Bowles, Christopher Jencks and Otis Dudley Duncan for their written comments class position for use in quantitative re- on an earlier version of the paper. search. We then will examine an empirical MARXIST CLASS CATEGORIES AND INCOME INEQUALITY 33 applicationof this operationalizationin the can be ordered in a hierarchical fashion. In study of income inequality. the Marxist perspective, classes are not, as Barber (1957:73) would have it, "divi- THEORETICAL BACKGROUND sional units within systems of social stratifi- cation." Classes constitute common posi- 1 The Marxist Concept of "Class" tions within social relations of production, Few conceptsin social sciencehave been and this means that classes must always be used in more diverse ways than "class." understood in terms of their relationship to To some sociologists, class refers to cate- other classes. Thus, the theoretical starting gories of people occupying common posi- point of a class analysis is to decode the tions within status hierarchies (Warner, social relations of production within a par- 1960; Parsons, 1970:24; Williams, 1960: ticular society in order to uncover the class 98). Others define classes as conflict positions which they determine. groups determinedby their position within The traditional Marxist analysis of the authorityor power structures(Dahrendorf, class structure of capitalist society has cen- 1959:138; Lenski, 1966:95). Sociologists tered on three criteria underlying social within the Weberiantradition see class as relations of production: (1) ownership of identifyinggroups of people with common the means of production; (2) purchase of economic"life chances"determined largely the labor power of others; (3) sale of one's by market relations (Weber, 1968:927; own labor power.2 These three criteria Giddens, 1973; Parkin, 1971:18-23). In generate the three basic class categories of contrastto these usages, Marxistshave de- capitalist society: capitalists own their own fined class primarilyin terms of common means of production, purchase the labor structuralpositions within the social or- power of others and do not sell their own ganizationof production(Bukharin, 1969: labor power; workers do not own their 276; Lenin, 1969:486). In contemporary own means of production and therefore Americansociety, this means definingclass cannot purchase the labor power of others, in termsof positionswithin capitalist social but do sell their own labor power to capi- relationsof production. talists; and the petty bourgeoisie do not sell There are three importantelements of their own labor power, nor (except per- this conception of class: classes constitute haps in a very limited way) purchase the common positions, those positions are re- labor power of others, but do own their lational and those relations are rooted in own means of production. For many pur- the social organizationof production. To poses, especially for the analysis of mid- say that classes constitutepositions implies, nineteenth century capitalism, these were to use Przeworski's(1976:3) apt expres- probably adequate criteria, at least as a sion, that there are "emptyplaces" in the first approximation; for the analysis of social structurewhich are filled by individ- contemporary capitalism, they need some uals. The analysis of class must be under- important extensions. stood primarily as the analysis of such The present analysis will focus on only empty places, and only secondarilyof the one of the possible extensions of this basic actual individualswho fill the slots. While typology, the emergence of an authority questions of social mobility are important structure within the capitalist enterprise in a class analysis,there is a logical priority which is partially differentiated from own- to understandingthe empty places into which individualsare sorted (see Poulan- tzas, 1973:49-50; Marx, 1967: 10). 2 It might appear that sale of one's own labor power is equivalent to not owning the means of Classes are not, however, just any production and thus is a redundant criterion. ''empty places" in social structurewhich However, in all class societies there are people who neither own the means of production nor sell their labor power-in precapitalist society, 1 For a much more elaborate discussion of the slaves; in capitalist society, students, many house- Marxist concept of class, see Wright (1976a:20- wives and others who do not participate directly 90; 1976b). in production. 34 AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW Table 1. Expanded Marxist Criteria for Class Criteriafor Class Position Purchaseof Control of Ownershipof the Labor the Labor Sale of One's the Means of Power of Power of Own Labor Production Others Others Power Capitalists Yes Yes Yes No Managers No No Yes Yes Workers No No No Yes Petty Bourgeoisie Yes No No No ership. This expanded typology is pre- implies the emergence of a new social cate- sented in Table 1. The traditional Marxist gory, generally referred to as managers. criterion of "employing labor power" Managers in this typology are wage-labor- really contains two distinct dimensions. ers who do not own their own means of First, being an employer gives the capitalist production, do not formally employ work- legal rights to the product of labor. Sec- ers, but who do control or supervise labor ond, being an employer gives the capitalist power. Thus they share some of the cri- control over the activities of labor, over teria of both workers