The bourgeoisie and the proletariat are two opposing social classes described by Karl Marx.
The fundamental difference between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat is ownership versus non-ownership of the means of production.
The bourgeoisie are the owners of factories, land, and capital, who profit from business and control economic power.
The proletariat are the working class, who sell their labor to survive but do not own the means of production.
This single economic distinction creates a cascade of inequalities, positioning the bourgeoisie as the dominant, powerful ruling class that shapes society’s institutions for its own benefit, and the proletariat as the subordinate, exploited working class.
Key Takeaways
- Ownership: The bourgeoisie own the means of production – factories, land, and capital – while the proletariat lack ownership and must sell their labor to survive.
- Power: Economic control gives the bourgeoisie political and cultural influence, while the proletariat remain largely powerless and subject to exploitation.
- Education: Schools reinforce class divisions by privileging the cultural capital of the wealthy and steering working-class children into lower-paid roles.
- Justice: The legal system often protects bourgeois interests and punishes working-class crime more harshly, masking the greater harms of corporate wrongdoing.
- Conflict: Marx argued that this unequal relationship inevitably produces class struggle, which could lead to revolutionary change and a classless society.
Fundamental Economic and Social Divisions
The bourgeoisie (the capitalist ruling class) are defined by their private ownership of the means of production – factories, companies, land, and capital.
They profit by purchasing and controlling the labour of others. As a minority group, their wealth and dominance derive from exploiting the majority’s labour.
The proletariat (the working class), by contrast, comprises those who do not own the means of production.
To survive, they must sell their labour power for wages.
This relationship is inherently exploitative: the value created by workers is greater than what they are paid, and the surplus is appropriated by the bourgeoisie as profit.
This economic split cascades into wider differences in status, opportunities, and life experiences, underpinning inequality across education, politics, and the justice system.
Marx and Friedrich Engels outlined this struggle in works such as The Communist Manifesto and Capital, arguing that capitalism is built on class conflict and that only a classless society could resolve these inequalities.
Relationship to Power and the State
Economic power translates into political and ideological power.
The bourgeoisie economic dominance translates directly into political and ideological power.
They are able to shape society’s institutions including the state, the law, and the criminal justice system- to serve their own interests.
The bourgeoisie uses this power to maintain the capitalist system and the class inequality that benefits them.
They effectively control the “superstructure” of society (political and ideological institutions) because it rests upon the economic “base” that they own.
This ruling class can influence laws to protect their private property and profits while criminalising the activities of the powerless.
Lacking ownership of the means of production, the proletariat is rendered powerless.
They are the subjects of the laws and social controls created by the bourgeoisie.
Their relationship with the bourgeoisie is one of domination and exploitation, where they are compelled to work under conditions dictated by the owners.
This leads to alienation, where workers feel divorced from their society, their work, and their sense of self.
Education and Class Reproduction
The education system plays a key role in maintaining class divisions. It is not a neutral institution but one that functions to the benefit of the bourgeoisie at the expense of the proletariat
The education system serves the interests of the capitalist class (bourgeoisie). It reproduces ruling-class culture and legitimises their privileged position.
Children of the bourgeoisie and middle classes possess more cultural capital – the dominant values, attitudes, and knowledge recognised by schools.
This gives them a built-in advantage, ensuring they are more likely to succeed academically and secure future positions of power.
Private education, in particular, prepares the children of the capitalist elite for these roles.
For the working class (proletariat), the education system is designed to create a docile and obedient workforce suited to exploitation.
It achieves this through a hidden curriculum that teaches working-class pupils to passively accept hierarchy, conformity, and their future roles as unskilled or semi-skilled workers.
The system is structured to deliberately engineer working-class failure because capitalism requires a supply of unskilled labour.
It is not meritocratic; rather, it reproduces class inequality by rewarding those from the dominant culture while blaming working-class individuals for their
Interaction with the Criminal Justice System
The criminal justice system operates unequally, systematically favouring the bourgeoisie while criminalising the proletariat.
The bourgeoisie commit crime, particularly white-collar and corporate crime, often driven by the same capitalist values of greed and competition that affect all classes.
However, their crimes are often rendered invisible or treated leniently.
The ruling class shapes the law to protect its own interests, ensuring that laws regulating business are weak and that loopholes exist to avoid taxes.
When members of the higher classes are caught, they are less likely to be prosecuted or imprisoned compared to street criminals
The proletariat are more likely to be criminalised.
The state selectively enforces laws, focusing on the “street crimes” often associated with the poor and working class, which gives the false impression that they are the primary source of society’s problems.
This scapegoating distracts from the harms caused by the ruling class and the inherent inequalities of capitalism.
Working-class crime is often a rational response to poverty, inequality, and alienation generated by the capitalist system itself
Summary Table
| Bourgeoisie | Proletariat | |
|---|---|---|
| Class position | Owns means of production | Works for wages |
| Means of production | Owns factories, land, infrastructure | Operates means of production they don’t own |
| Income source | Profits, investments, rents | Wages, salaries |
| Wealth | Accumulates capital | No capital, lives paycheck to paycheck |
| Political power | Dominant class with great influence | Minimal influence as individuals |
| Lifestyle | Comfortable, even extravagant living | Bare subsistence level living |
| Typical jobs | Factory owners, bankers, executives | Factory workers, clerks, service workers |
| Education | Quality schools, often highly educated | Lower quality public schools, less education |
| Values | Uphold status quo, individual achievement | Seek social change, collective interests |
The Bourgeoisie
The term bourgeoisie is one that dates back centuries, but rose to prominence with Marx’s concept of the class struggle.
In Marxism, the term bourgeoisie refers to a social order dominated by the ruling or capitalist class, those who own property and, thus, the means of production.
According to Marx, the bourgeoisie is the ruling class in capitalist societies. That is, economic power gives access to political power and cultural influence.
The bourgeoisie, sometimes called the capitalists, own the means of production. They are the owners of capital and are able to acquire the means of creating goods and services, such as natural resources, or machinery.
With their capital, the bourgeoisie can purchase and exploit labor power, using the surplus value that their employees generate to accumulate or expand their capital (Wolf & Resnick, 2013).
The key differentiation between the bourgeoisie and other social elites is this ownership of the means of production.
Managers of the state or landlords, for example, are not part of the bourgeoisie because capitalists must be actively involved in capital accumulation by using money to organize the means of production and employ and exploit labor to further generate capital.
Marx believed that the bourgeoisie began in medieval Europe with traders, merchants, craftspeople, industrialists, manufacturers, and so on who could increase wealth through industry. These individuals employed labor to create capital (Wolf & Resnick, 2013).
Petty Bourgeoisie
Petty bourgeoisie is a term derived from French, often employed to pejoratively describe a social class comprising small-size merchants and semi-autonomous peasants whose ideological position during socioeconomic stability reflects the high bourgeoisie whose morality it endeavors to emulate.
The term, petty bourgeoisie, has been used by various Marxist theorists (including Marx himself) to denote the ranks of the bourgeoisie comprising those sandwiched between the supposedly wealthy owners of the means of production and the oppressed proletariat.
In Marx’s categorization of social classes, the petty bourgeoisie are self-employed, or those who employ a few laborers in their economic activity.
These are associated with the shop-keeping or independent artisan class, who form a buffer between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.
The Modern Bourgeoisie
The bourgeoisie of today includes CEOs, major shareholders, corporate executives, financial elites, and tech billionaires.
Like the 19th-century capitalists Marx observed, they control the means of production – though production today may include factories, digital platforms, global corporations, and vast networks of data.
-
Economic dominance: These individuals and groups command enormous wealth. A small minority owns a disproportionate share of global assets, stocks, and companies. For example, studies often show that the top 1% controls more wealth than the bottom half of society combined.
-
Political and cultural influence: Ownership brings not just money, but power. The bourgeoisie lobby governments, fund political campaigns, and shape laws in their favour. Their interests are often protected through tax loopholes, weak regulation, and corporate-friendly policies.
-
Control of ideology: Beyond politics, the ruling class influences culture and values through control of media, advertising, and education. This makes capitalist systems appear normal, meritocratic, or inevitable, while concealing the structural inequalities on which they rest.
The Proletariat
The second major class in Marxism is the proletariat, who own their labor, but none of the means of production.
Because these workers have no property, they must find employment in order to survive and obtain an income.
The proletariat are a class of people who, in the view of Marx, compose the majority of society. They sell their ability to do work and their labor in order to survive.
Engels illustrated the image of the proletariat as a class in his study of the working class in Manchester in 1833, which happened concurrently with Marx’s discovery of the proletariat on the streets of Paris.
Proletarians literally have nothing to sell but their labor power.
Unlike the bourgeoisie, the proletariat does not own the means of production.
Karl Marx considered this dynamic to be one of exploitation, where the Bourgeoisie absorbs the value of the goods and services that the proletariat produce without paying this value back to them.
In a capitalist society, the proletariat are legally free and separated from the means of production. The proletariat do not receive the value of their goods that their labour produces, but only the cost of subsistence.
The exploitation of the proletariat by the capitalist, however, means that the proletariat is unable to earn enough to acquire his own means of production.
Because he does not own the means of production, he does not have all of the factors of production. This keeps him in a continual cycle of exploitation by capitalists (Wolf & Resnick, 2013).
Being confined to a component means that workers lose value and are potentially less skilled when seeking other employment (Chiapello, 2013).
The Modern Proletariat
The proletariat has expanded far beyond traditional industrial workers. In modern economies, it includes gig workers, delivery drivers, call centre employees, service staff, and many salaried white-collar professionals who lack control over production.
-
Dependence on wages: Most people today, like Marx’s proletariat, survive by selling their labour for wages or salaries. They do not own significant capital and cannot live off investments or property alone.
-
Exploitation and surplus value: Workers typically generate more value than they are paid. For example, a fast-food worker might generate hundreds of pounds or dollars of profit in a day, while only receiving a fraction as wages. The surplus is captured by the employer.
-
Polarisation of jobs: The modern labour market is “hourglass-shaped”: high-skill, high-pay jobs at the top, and insecure, low-paid jobs at the bottom, with fewer stable mid-level positions. This increases dependence on the bourgeoisie for precarious work.
-
Alienation: Many modern workers experience alienation—feeling disconnected from their labour and its products—whether it’s a factory worker on an assembly line or a gig worker whose app-based employer controls hours, pay, and conditions.
Proletariat Revolution
Marxists see capitalism as an unstable system that will eventually result in a series of crises.
The more that capitalism grows, the more people take advantage of it, and the more oppressed, degraded, and exploited the proletariat will be (Marx, 1873).
Eventually, capitalism will result in a revolt by the proletariat, according to Marxists. This will lead to the dismantling of capitalism to make way for a socialist or communist state.
In the Communist Manifesto, written in 1848, Marx and Engels proposed that the proletariat revolution was inevitable and would be caused by the continued exploitation of the capitalists.
The workers will eventually revolt due to increasingly worse working conditions and low wages.
Marx argued that a social revolution would mean changing the existing social and political system from a capitalist to a communist society. A communist society means there are no social classes or private property.
The result of the revolution is that capitalism will be replaced by a classless society in which private property will be replaced with collective ownership. This will mean that society will become communist.
The bourgeoisie and proletariat remain central categories for understanding inequality.
The bourgeoisie, in both traditional and new forms, continue to own and control wealth, resources, and culture.
The proletariat, though more diverse than in Marx’s time, are still dependent on wages and vulnerable to exploitation.
Challenges and Nuances to the Two-Class Model
Although Marx’s framework highlights structural inequality, modern sociologists emphasise that class divisions are more complex than a simple two-way split.
Rise of a Complex Middle Class
-
The expansion of professionals, managers, and skilled workers complicates Marx’s model.
-
These individuals often have high incomes and status without owning the means of production.
-
Their position relies on educational qualifications and professional expertise, making them distinct from both the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.
-
This “new middle class” includes doctors, teachers, accountants, and engineers, with internal divisions (upper-middle vs. lower-middle) based on income, lifestyle, and prestige.
Postmodernism and Decline of Class Identity
-
Postmodernist thinkers argue that class is no longer the main source of identity.
-
Instead, identity is shaped by consumer choices, lifestyle, ethnicity, gender, and sexuality.
-
People may acknowledge inequality exists but are less likely to describe themselves in class terms. For example, many working-class individuals identify as “middle class” based on lifestyle or aspiration.
Shift to Postindustrial, Information-Based Economies
-
Economic power today often lies in control of information, technology, and networks, rather than traditional ownership of factories.
-
Figures like tech moguls and media conglomerates represent a new kind of bourgeoisie.
-
The outsourcing of manufacturing and the dominance of service-sector jobs have eroded the traditional blue-collar working class.
-
This transition has created an identity crisis for some groups, particularly working-class men, as stable jobs disappear and communities lose their economic base.
Meritocracy and Cultural Capital
-
Functionalists argue modern societies operate as meritocracies, where success depends on talent and hard work.
-
Conflict theorists, however, view meritocracy as a myth that masks inequality.
-
Access to cultural capital (language, values, and knowledge passed down by middle- and upper-class families) gives the bourgeoisie and upper middle class an enduring advantage.
-
Schools and universities often reproduce these inequalities by rewarding the cultural capital of the privileged, while blaming working-class failure on individuals rather than structures.
Historical Context: The Rise of the Bourgeoisie and Proletariat
The origins of the bourgeoisie and proletariat are tied to the massive social, economic, and technological changes of the Industrial Revolution.
As societies shifted from farming to factory production, new classes emerged that reflected the realities of capitalism.
From Farms to Factories
Before industrialisation, most people lived in agricultural, preindustrial societies.
Life centred on farming, with families working together to produce what they needed.
Social status was largely fixed at birth: the landed nobility owned the fields, while peasants and serfs worked them.
The division of labour was simple—farmers, blacksmiths, bakers—usually within small, rural communities.
The 18th and 19th centuries brought a dramatic transformation:
-
Technological invention: Innovations like the steam engine allowed goods to be produced faster and more cheaply.
-
Factory system: Production moved from small workshops into large factories, where workers laboured for an employer rather than for themselves.
-
Urbanisation: People left the countryside in huge numbers to find jobs in industrial cities.
The Birth of the Bourgeoisie
This new economic system – capitalism – was based on private ownership of factories, tools, and land, all used for the pursuit of profit.
Out of it rose the bourgeoisie, the capitalist class who owned the means of production.
-
They were the factory owners, industrialists, and entrepreneurs who built vast fortunes by running businesses.
-
Unlike the old feudal aristocracy, this group gained power through wealth earned in their lifetimes, not inherited land. Families like the Rockefellers became symbols of this new elite.
-
Their economic power extended into politics, law, and culture. As Marx argued, those who control the economy shape the whole “superstructure” of society, ensuring that laws and institutions protect their property and interests.
The Birth of the Proletariat
The same forces that created the bourgeoisie also gave rise to the proletariat, or working class.
-
As farming declined, displaced peasants and rural labourers moved into cities to work in factories.
-
They owned no factories or land, only their ability to work. To survive, they had to sell this labour to the bourgeoisie in return for wages.
-
Conditions were harsh: long hours, unsafe environments, and extremely low pay. The workers produced wealth, but most of it flowed upward to the factory owners.
Marx argued this system was fundamentally exploitative.
The bourgeoisie profited by extracting surplus value – the difference between what workers produced and what they were paid.
This left the proletariat alienated: cut off from their labour, from each other, and from a sense of control over their own lives.
References
Callinicos, A. (2003). Anti-capitalist manifesto. Polity.
Chiapello, E. (2013). Capitalism and its criticisms. New spirits of capitalism? Crises, justifications, and dynamics, 60-81.
Jahan, S., & Mahmud, A. S. (2015). What is capitalism. International Monetary Fund, 52(2), 44-45.
Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1967). The communist manifesto . 1848. Trans. Samuel Moore. London: Penguin, 15.
Mueller, D. C. (Ed.). (2012). The Oxford handbook of capitalism. Oxford University Press.
Rand, A. (1967). What is capitalism? (pp. 11-34). Second Renaissance Book Service.
Sagarra, E. (2017). The bourgeoisie. In A Social History of Germany 1648-1914 (pp. 253-262). Routledge.
Siegrist, E. (2007). Bourgeoisie, History of. in Ritzer, G. (Ed.). Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology.
Stern, B. J. (1948). Engels on the Family. Science & Society, 42-64.
Resnick, S. A., & Wolff, R. D. (2013). Marxism. Rethinking Marxism, 25(2), 152-162.
Weber, M. (1921). The City.
Weber, M. (1930). The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. New York, NY: Charles Scribner”s Sons (reprint 1958).
Weber, M. (1936). Social actions.
