Research Paper on:
Free Market Relevance of Social Stratification

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
have-nots or bourgeoisie and proletariat. To Marx, the stratification of society was rather simple, unlike some other theorists who see the division more as shades of gray. How might the  authors of the Federalist Papers, or the Founding Fathers of the United States, view the political significance of Marxs class conflict thesis? Might the very same people who endorse democracy  side with Marx at all? Are there any similarities? What do authors of the Federalist Papers have to say about class conflict? First, it is important to look  at the general ideas behind the Federalist Papers as well as the ideas behind its opposing factions. Federalists supported the Constitution as it is known, while Anti-federalists had a lot  to gripe about. The issue of state power versus central power has been significant throughout American history, but was most significant during the early period when the Constitution was  first created. That is because much of what happened during the drafting of the Constitution would impact law for centuries to come. Thomas Jefferson was among the Anti-federalists. Hamilton, Washington  and Madison on the other hand were strongly associated with the federalist position. The debate between the two groups does to some extent relate to class in that Federalists wanted  a central controlling force, and this is something that one might align with communism. Under communism, in order to cement class differences, there must be a central power. States having  more power suggests that there may be inequities in terms of class, economics, and politics. Yet, the Federalist Papers was entrenched with notions of social stratification. The economic notion of  pressure groups may be traced back to the Federalist Papers (Osborne, 2001). Modern economic analysis emphasizes economic interests and is not really concerned with the sources regarding factional