Bourdieusian class analysis and labor, exploitation and production: A response to Seim and McCarthy

In a recent paper in this journal, Seim and McCarthy continued the ongoing debate between Marxists and Bourdieusians over the meaning and purpose of class analysis. Taking issue with Bourdieu’s apparent neglect of labor, exploitation and production, they suggested that whatever insights Bourdieu may have had should be encased within a Marxist framework giving priority to these three elements of class. In this response, I make the opposite case, suggesting how and why traditional Marxist concerns with labor, exploitation and production relationships can and should be embedded within a Bourdieuisan framework. This, I argue, offers the most coherent and encompassing platform for critical sociology today.