Aage Sorensen, in "Toward a Sounder Basis for Class Analysis," argues that
Marxists are correct in placing exploitation at the center of class analysi
s since an exploitation-centered concept of class has a much greater potent
ial for explaining the structural foundations of social conflicts over ineq
uality than does its principle rival, the material "life conditions" concep
tion of class.' But he also believes that existing concepts of exploitation
are seriously compromised due to an absence of rigorous theoretical founda
tions. To solve this problem he proposes rehabilitating the concept of expl
oitation by closely identifying it with the economic concept of rent. This,
he believes, retains the fundamental sociological meaning of exploitation
while giving the concept much more theoretical precision and analytical pow
er.
I share with Sorensen the commitment to reconstructing an exploitation-cent
ered concept of class (Wright 1979, 1985, 1989, 1997). And, like Sorensen,
I believe that a rigorous concept of exploitation can be elaborated without
the use of the labor theory of value. I have also argued that there is a c
lose link between the concept of economic rent and various forms of exploit
ation. I disagree, however, that exploitation can be fruitfully defined sim
ply in terms of rent-generating processes or that a class analysis built on
such foundations will be satisfactory. The objective of this article is to
explain why I feel rent alone does not provide a "sounder basis" for class
analysis.
In the next section I will briefly summarize the central ideas of Sorensen'
s proposal. This will be followed by an explication of an alternative conce
ptualization of exploitation which sees exploitation as not simply rent-gen
erated advantages, but advantages that involve the appropriation of labor e
ffort of the exploited by exploiters. The article will conclude with a disc
ussion of the complex relationship between rent and exploitation.