Sociology for Marxian Idea of Egalitarianism -myassignmenthelp

Question: Write about theSociology for Marxian Idea of Egalitarianism. Answer: Introduction The term egalitarian society refers to such a social construct in which there is no evidence of inequality or discrimination in any aspect. An egalitarian society is expected to take care of the poor and weak members, treat all of its members with equal dignity, and provide equal opportunities for all, irrespective of caste, class, gender, age and economic status. This type of societies discourages any kind of discrimination and works towards creating an environment, where equality is promoted. The society strives to achieve equal distribution and opportunities with respect to income, skills, capacities, affordability and freedom (Hirose, 2014). Marxian Idea of Egalitarianism Marxism believes that the advent of revolution is required and is evident which will establish a socialistic construct and will eventually result in a communist structure. Marx did not accept egalitarianism as a mere societal sub-ordination to one universal interest. He believed in a classlessness where the residents are entitled to get the privileges and opportunities not according to their abilities but according to what they need (Veneziani, 2012). Egalitarianism and Australian Society The society of Australia is widely considered as one of the primary promoters of the egalitarian construct of living. The country, as believed by many, has worked significantly, in reducing discriminations in an overall framework. The country, being one of the global leaders in the economic scenario, has also succeeded in different societal and welfare aspects. The country has reduced gender discriminations substantially, increased the overall participation in attaining higher education, has recorded sustained period of lowering unemployment and the prosperity of the economy has to some extent seen to be percolated to the low income and less privileged sections of the society (Grant et al., 2012). The country, apparently, does not have any class based or income based stratification and is said to be striving to achieve a society there is no class-based struggle and the significance and contribution of all the residents are equally valued. The taxation and the budgetary system of the economy are such that they promote equality in distribution of welfare in the society by taxing the poor less and the rich more. This indicates towards the presence of egalitarianism in the society and also to some extent relates to the Marxian view of an equal society (Saunders Wong, 2013). However, the country being primarily capitalistic and with the provisions of private properties, in reality cannot associate with the views of Marx. Also the society of Australia, though taken to be egalitarian per se, if studied carefully shows several loopholes, which are discussed in the following sections. Drawbacks In the recent social scenario in the country, several issues are cropping up, which are challenging the existence of egalitarian society. Some of which are as follows: Much of the traditional political goals of the country, of attaining equal welfare for all, are being challenged in the recent times due to the presence of hostility and intoxication in the Federal Coalition which, by taking control of the economy is intervening in the traditional areas and giving rise to radicalism in society as a whole. The second factor contributing to the slipping of egalitarianism from the society is the recent threat of unemployment. Unemployment, as discussed above had decreased substantially in the past few decades with new opportunities coming in thereby increasing the welfare of the residents in general. However, the recent polarization in the employment sector has led to creation of employed poor. These people, though employed, are not enjoying a life of standard quality. Much of it is attributed to underemployment, low payment, casual types of jobs and lack of entitlement to the facilities which a proper employee should be eligible to receive. The labor market is also getting distorted due to the increasing burden of dependency ration in the economy (Mays Marston, 2016). The geographical location differences are also contributing to the distortions in quality of life as much of the status and employment scopes are not available to those families which are living in the remote areas, with third world conditions prevailing in many of these remote areas. This indicates towards a prevalence of inequality with respect to employment and service opportunities in the economy. If seen minutely, a dualistic trend can be seen to be developing in the education and health sectors of the country also, with two types of privileges, one for rich and one for the poorer section. The residents are not much trustful when the government is concerned and there exist an attitude of materialism and competitive way of operating, these two being highly contrasting to the characteristics of an egalitarian society (Cole, 2014). Conclusion and Recommendation From the above discussion, it is evident that the societal construct of Australia, though boasts to be a staunch egalitarian one, in the recent times, are showing several dominating traits, which are not at par with the requirements of an egalitarian society. The country, in order to achieve back their title of one of the most successful egalitarian society, needs to work on increasing their social mobility and work on designing policies which help in expanding the capacities of the people in general. The society should emphasize on increasing equal distribution of facilities like education, skill, transport and employment, especially focusing on those who suffer highly from the affordability issues and for doing this the government can draw resources from the exiting pro-rich development policies. References Cole, B. (2014). Egalitarianism.Guardian (Sydney), (1648), 7. Grant, S., Kajii, A., Polak, B., Safra, Z. (2012). Equally-distributed equivalent utility, ex post egalitarianism and utilitarianism.Journal of Economic Theory,147(4), 1545-1571. Hirose, I. (2014).Egalitarianism. Routledge. Mays, J., Marston, G. (2016). Reimagining equity and egalitarianism: The basic income debate in Australia.J. Soc. Soc. Welfare,43, 9. Saunders, P., Wong, M. (2013). Examining Australian attitudes to inequality and redistribution.The Journal of Australian Political Economy, (71), 51. Veneziani, R. (2012). Analytical Marxism.Journal of Economic Surveys,26(4), 649-673.