Egypt is a North African country with a high population of the Arabs. The main religion of the country is Islam though there are also Christians and other religious groups sparsely spread all over the country. Social inequality in Egypt is one of the worst in the region. As a bigger population of the country struggle to live below a dollar, the cities keep on rising with skyscrapers. The poor-rich gap keeps on widening. Apart from the evident distinct gap between the poor and the rich, gender inequality is on the rise. Women have gained a little recognition in the country. When compared, many people who are learned in Egypt are men. This shows that boys are given a better opportunity to study than their counterpart female. Female genital mutilation and early marriages to girls are just some of the few signs to show that the gender inequality in Egypt is high. As if these are not enough, politics have been the center of inequality in the region. For a long time, the political arena of Egypt has been dominated by the wealthy where the poor stand aside waiting for their fate to be decided. Until the Arab Spring, which started in Tunisia in 2011, Egypt’s political arena was led by a hereditary regime where one will take over from a brother. In 2000, Egyptians knew that Gamal Mubarak, Hosni’s younger son was going to take over the presidency from his aging father. The Arab spring saw Mubarak overthrown from the office and the leadership chain broken. With very high expectation, Egyptians thought that the shift in political powers was a means through which the inequality was going to end in the country. However, unlike their beliefs and thoughts, Egypt is yet to realize its potential five years after the revolution. The inequality in the region is still evident. This paper is aimed at how Karl Marx’s theory can be used to understand such inequities, how such theory compares to that of Max Weber. Additionally, this paper will evaluate whether the two ideas need one another to make the inequality conditions in Egypt clear or whether only one can be enough.
Karl Max
Karl Marx is one of the greatest philosophers whose work can be used to understand inequality in Egypt. His work is based on a capitalist community where the rich will do all they can to ensure that they remain in power. His work revolves around the poor and the powerless. In his work, Marx argues that in a communist society, the rich will always do what it takes to ensure that the poor remain under their control. According to Muntaner (p.270), Marx believes that the influential in the society such as the politicians will also ensure that people or the citizens remain under their leadership. The poor, on the other hand, will always work hard to ensure they get a reward. Marx points out on the control over the law, police and other authorities as the principal means through which the powerful remains in power. Media according to Karl Marx is a powerful tool that when controlled by the powerful in the community can make them hang onto power for as long as they wanted. When what people hear and see is controlled by the government, there is a high chance that they will only be fed with propaganda and make the government look good.
Strengths of Karl Marx’s theory of understanding inequality in Egypt
The greatest strength of Karl Marx’s theory is view on the society. According to Max, in a communist society, there are only two classes that exist. The bourgeoisie is the owners of the means of production, factories, and they are the ones who control the media. The second class is the proletariat. The proletariats according to Marx are those who work for the bourgeoisie for rewards. The first inequality will be experienced between the two categories. Marx says that the bourgeoisie would control the society at all cost forming a capitalist society. The capitalist society, according to Marx must be fought and defeated with a great revolution. This thinking connects Marx’s theory with the Egyptian situation well.
Even after Hosni Mubarak was overthrown, Egypt still did not gain the equality it was craving for. Mohammed Morsi took over the president, and people hoped that things could be different. However, the outcome was not as expected. According to Marx, the roots of inequality are engraved in people’s beliefs and that change in power cannot in whatever chance bring in a change in equality (McMurtry, p.32). Marx’s theory of variation has a mighty strength to help us understand how comes people did not gain the independence from poverty and discrimination in Egypt as they thought before. Even during the period of revolution, there are those Egyptians who were still for Mubarak and did not join the Revolution. The main reason is that such factions had strong connections with the political powers at that moment, maybe because the media manipulated them.
Marx talks about the press and its position in the present society. According to Marx, in case the people in power can have control over the media, then they can be able to hold on power and extend the inequality (Muntaner, p.271). It is true that Egypt never enjoyed media freedom before. The government sieved the content that was aired in the press. Radios and TVs must get their materials approved before airing any content. This for sure shows that Marx’s theory has a massive strength to explain why people in Egypt got oppressed without shouting a word.
Weaknesses of Marx theory
As much as Karl Marx’s theory of inequality can be used broadly to explain the difference in Egypt, it still has shortcomings making it, not a standalone approach. Karl Marx’s theory cannot explain why there is a constant struggle for power the same as that which was witnessed in Egypt. According to Karl Marx, the capitalist life is never desirable, yet the people of Egypt laid down their lives to overthrow a government to gain a capitalist life. In his theory, Karl Marx says that the proletariats will work to earn a reward. He does not mention when the level of inequality becomes unbearable that the proletariats turn against the bourgeoisie.
In the case of Egypt, inequality is witnessed in almost all aspects of life from gender, wealth ownership to the political structure. According to Marx, some differences will automatically seize to exist as people gain the understanding of one another and civilization gained. Even with a great civilization of most of the Egyptians living in towns, still there is still inequality between genders amongst the elites.
Marx Weber
Marx Weber theory is anchored on three major aspects; power, status, and class. According to Weber, inequality in the society is as a result of people’s thirst for power and the believe that there are those who are better than the others. This theory can be used to explain the reasons why there has been a significant level of inequality in Egypt.
Strengths of Weber theory
Weber’s theory, unlike many theories including Marxist theory, includes a critical aspect that has led to inequality in the society, and that is status. Sometimes, power is never enough when one is in control. Some other issues drive people to have control over one another. Wealth can only be realized where there are others who lack and stink in poverty (Ragnedda, p.6). This is where status comes in. Egypt is a country known for a big rich-poor gap. Apart from the fact that there are those who do not work hard enough to accumulate wealth, there are those who will not allow them to do so even when they could. The pride that rests in a few in the society cause a bigger inequality level and that is why wealth has rested among a few elites in Egypt rather than spreading it over the larger community.
Weber’s theory can also explain the racial inequality in the country better. According to Saouli (p.44), Egypt is known for its lack of support for women. Women are less represented even in the parliament. While other nations bordering Egypt are already on the move to realize their full potential on women rights, Egypt is lagging behind. Status, an aspect of Weber’s theory, can be a better explanation of why the country still does not have a better environment for the women rights to thrive. Men dominate most of the activities in Egypt. A sign that men try to exercise their ego and pride that is common among most of the Egyptians.
The class is another point of strength. Everyone want to be in a particular class. Higher class is always the most desirable. When class is combined with the desire to rule, inequality must exist. Those in power wants class and hence will ensure they oppress the opposition the same way the Egyptian regime did to remain in the authority. According to Weber, when someone gains a certain standard of life, they are ever relentless to climb down the ladder (Bergesen, p.136). It is people’s hunger for success that makes them grab a lot they do not deserve. In Egypt, there are classes of people. The wealthy and the have-nots. The rich will do all they can to ensure that they remain rich. If it means that they exploit the poor to stay prosperous, they will do it. This is a significant strength since it is clear that in Egypt, inequality is major as a result of poverty and uneven distribution of resources.
The final strength of Weberian theory is that unlike other theories, it is very simple and can be understood and applied easily in any setup. The theory talks about three values which are found in almost all the society. No society can exist with power, class and status. The Egyptian can be explained easily using the Weberian theory since all the aspects discussed within the theory exists in the Egyptian setup.
Weaknesses
This theory still needs other approaches to explain the Egyptian condition entirely. Unlike the Marxist theory, this theory does not fully explain why people will revolt against a government the same way it happened in Egypt. The other weakness of this approach is that it does not put into consideration that wealth distribution is never even. People will have to be exposed to power and class for them to gain such privileges. Egypt is one of the countries that is highly dependent on the Rive Nile for irrigation purposes. Inequality can be as a result of lack of proper distribution of natural resources since not everyone has access to the river. Those who are far will have to depend on other activities to ensure that they do not remain behind economically. The Weberian theory does not explain how such environmental factors has led to the inequality in the region. Economic inequalities in the country cannot be explained solely by the Weberian theory since the argument is anchored only on the society that is developed, where wealth is available in plenty. A country like Egypt where its people depend on Agriculture and fight drought will have little impact on the class. Therefore, Weberian theory has limitations in explaining the inequality conditions in Egypt since it does not put environmental factors as a contributor to inequality.
The other biggest weakness of Weber’s theory is the fact that it has addressed most of the events presented by Karl Marx. It is not easy for anyone to rely solely on Weber because the theory does not have a distinction with that of Marx besides discussing class and status in the society. Additionally, Weberian theory has shortcomings when it comes to dealing with African matters where resources are very scarce. According to Weberian theory, the society is a setup where people strive to be powerful, have class and keep such status which is very uncommon in places where people are poor such as in Egypt. The theory does not consider those who strive daily to make sure that ends meet and not motivated by power or class.
Karl Marx theory cannot solely account for the situation in Egypt since some occurrences happened in Egypt that it could not explain. Karl Marx had plenty of weaknesses to explain why gender inequality is still evident in Egypt even after most of the Egyptians had gained the education on why it is important to appreciate women in the community. One will not find it easy to explain the levels of inequality in Egypt through looking at the work of Karl Marx alone. As much as we need Karl Marx to understand communism and the two classes those who owns the industries and the workers, we still need Weber to know why there is the necessity of power and politics. Marx argues that power is to ensure that the bourgeoisie remains in control of the resources. Weber helps us understand this better by introducing class and status. Apart from the fact that people would want to be politically powerful, there are those who have no political ambition but rather maintain their social class and status. That is the reason they will control the ports and oil wells to ensure no unnecessary competition enters in the areas they dominate and hence inequality.
Conclusion
It can be concluded that as much as Weber’s theory can be used to explain the inequality in Egypt, it cannot stand alone same to Marxist. Understanding the situation in Egypt and the power struggle that was witnessed during the Arab Spring, it will be important when both the theories are used together to explain the situation. Using a single approach solely will lead to ambiguity and most questions unanswered. Thus, this paper’s stance is that no one-size-fits-all approach can be used to explain not only the inequality levels in Egypt but also in other parts of the world where the same is experienced.
Works cited
Bergesen, Albert J., and Michelle Bata. "Global and national inequality: are they connected?." journal of world-systems research 8.1 (2015): 130-144.
McMurtry, John. Structure of Marx's World-View. Princeton University Press, 2015.
Muntaner, Carles, et al. "Two decades of Neo-Marxist class analysis and health inequalities: A critical reconstruction." Social Theory & Health (2015): 267-287.
Ragnedda, Massimo, and Glenn W. Muschert. "Digital Divide| Max Weber and Digital Divide Studies—Introduction." International Journal of Communication 9 (2015): 6.
Saouli, Adham. "Performing the Egyptian Revolution: Origins of collective restraint action in the Midan." Political Studies 63.4 (2015): 730-746.
