Comparing Marx And Durkheim's Theories Of Law

Marx and Durkheim are 2 sociologists that had very different views on law, and how it should be practiced. While Marx believed that law is determined by the economy, and social inequality. Durkheim believed that law is more of a social phenomenon, and was shaped by what society deemed worth enforcing. I have to say, that both can be true in their own form, as the rich seem to be nearly invincible and untouchable in our country, which can be backed up by Marx’s theory of social inequality. But when it comes to everyday people like myself and my peers, Durkheim's theory is more applicable. I think, in their own ways, parts of both theories are true. Regarding Marx, Marx believed that law is determined almost entirely by the economy and a rigid social structure. Further, he states that law is rooted in a race for economic power and laws are put into place by the economic elite to further perpetuate the repression of the …show more content…
If society feels that a law needs to be established, than society will establish it. I believe that this too, applies to our society. We dislike murder, so what do we do? We make murder illegal. The same thing applies to seemingly insignificant things, like traffic violations. Do we all like them? Not necessarily, but they are put into place to establish order because society needs order. Without traffic violations, car related deaths would skyrocket and roads would not be a safe place for people, which can't work because car is most people's primary means of transportation. The same applies to most other laws, but this can also prove to contradict itself because of what Marx’s theory states. Do rich people need tax breaks? No, society does not need rich people to have tax breaks, and actually society would likely benefit if the rich paid more taxes. So Durkheim’s theory, while true in certain aspects, is false in