CAPITALISMlaborer selling his labor power’’ (Marx, quoted in
Sweezy 1970 pp. 56–57). The emergence of the
free laborer represents the destruction of other
noncapitalist economic forms. Feudal or slave
economies, for example, are not characterized by
the recognized right of laborers to sell their own
labor power as a commodity. Simple commodity
production, or economies in which laborers own
their own means of production (tools, equipment,
etc.), are not characterized by the need for labor-
ers to sell their labor power as a commodity. In the
latter case, Weber concurs with Marx that this
freedom is only formal since such laborers are
compelled to sell their labor by the ‘‘whip of
hunger.’’
The sociological conception of capitalism also
varies with particular theoretical understandings
of the nature of history. Marxists, guided by an
evolutionlike vision of history, tend to see capital-
ism as a stage in humanity’s progressive movement
to a communist future. In this manner, Marxist
sociology also often refers to various phases of
capitalism. Wright (1978 pp. 168–169), for exam-
ple, describes six stages of capitalist development:
primitive accumulation, manufacture, machino-
facture, monopoly capital, advanced monopoly
capital, and state-directed monopoly capitalism.
The implicit assumptions of law-like forces at work
in the historical process are evident in the Marxist
confidence that capitalism, like all previous socioe-
conomic orders, will eventually be destroyed by
the internal contradictions it generates. Referenc-
es to the current stage of capitalism as ‘‘late capital-
ism’’ (e.g., Mandel 1978), for instance, reveal a
belief in the inevitability of capitalism’s demise.
The Weberian tradition, on the other hand,
rejects the assumption of history’s governance by
‘‘iron laws.’’ This leads to a recognition of various
types of capitalism but without the presumption
that capitalism must eventually be eliminated. The
Weberian tradition discovers in the history of
Western capitalism a process of rationalization
toward depersonalization, improved monetary cal-
culability, increased specialization, and greater tech-
nical control over nature as well as over persons
(Brubaker 1984). However, while the Weberian
tradition can expect the probability of continued
capitalist rationalization, it does not predict the
inevitability of such a course for history. It is impor-
tant to note that, for Weber, a transition from
capitalism to socialism would probably only fur-
ther this rationalization. Such developments were
seen as associated with industrial society and bu-
reaucratic forms of domination rather than with
capitalism per se.
This background permits a more detailed ex-
amination of contemporary sociology’s treatment
of capitalism. Already, it can be seen that sociolo-
gy’s understanding of capitalism is more specific
than popular conceptions of capitalism as simply
‘‘free-market’’ or ‘‘free-enterprise’’ systems. This is
especially so insofar as sociology focuses its atten-
tion on modern society. It is the emergence of a
‘‘free market’’ in human labor that sociology tends
to recognize as the distinguishing characteristic of
modern capitalism. For Durkheimian sociology,
this market guides the normal division of labor
that is the basis of social solidarity. In this view, the
absolute freedom of such a market is necessary to
generate the conditions of equal opportunity that
are required to guarantee norms by which people
come to accept capitalism’s highly developed divi-
sion of labor. Under conditions of a truly free
labor market, the stratification system is seen as
legitimate since individuals attain their position
through their own achievement and not by means
of some ascribed status (e.g., caste, gender, race,
ethnicity, nepotism) or political patronage. For
Marxian sociology, it is in this labor market that
the two fundamental and opposing classes of capi-
talism meet: the owners of the means of produc-
tion or capitalists (bourgeoisie) and the workers
(proletariat). In this view, the struggle between
these two classes is the dynamic force behind
capitalist development. For Weberian sociology,
this market for human labor is necessary for the
development of the advanced and superior calcu-
lability of capitalist economic action. This calcula-
bility is, in turn, a fundamental component of the
rationalization process in modern Western society.This transformation of human labor into a
commodity is the force behind both capitalism’s
internal dynamism as well as its outward expan-
sion. On the one hand, capitalism is constantly
driven to enhance its productivity. This compul-
sion of modern capitalism continuously to devel-
op its technical capacity to produce is not driven
simply by competition among capitalists but is
related to the unique role that human labor plays
in capitalist production. Prior to the emergence of
a market for human labor, premodern forms of