The essential problem with societies, is that “classes” are a natural result of the need for societies to organize themselves and the resulting social pecking order. It is said that if you observe most wild, but social animals, you will see a pecking order develop. Thus “classes” emerge naturally from any association of human beings, as anyone who endured American High School or works for another person, will remember from experience. These are “natural” classes, and no Marxist is ever going to do away with them.
Indeed my critique of Marxism started with the obvious observation that no Marxist society ever did away with classes. They may have tried to kill all their “beourgeous” but in the process they inevitably allowed others to step in and take their place. This led to the awful result of most Communist societies developing quickly a very dark darkside as first an intelligentsia and ideological class developed, and then it was “eaten up” by people who were “posing” to play the game and get ahead. Thus the “Communist Party” in every case has become a class even more oppressive of workers than ever the Owner class was.


But that doesn’t mean that the Marxian critique of “class warfare” was completely invalid. Just like most critiques provisional and highly flawed. Class warfare does occur. And that results from the very natural fact that once people have something they don’t want to give it up. That some people will lie cheat and steal to keep what they have. And that some people aren’t content with that but eventually see acquisition and power as a “game” to be played for the ‘victory.’ In an ideal society these natural conflicts will be regulated and adjudicated in such a way that the rich are limited in their power, but the powerful and rich will always be with us, and the more we try to regulate them the more someone will find a way to use our naive efforts to their own ends. As Orwell described in his fable “Animal Farm” — the pigs will always be with us.
The other thing that happens as societies evolve, is that no change is fully accepted by everybody. The result is that somebody always feels alienated. You build a suburbia of “Levit-towns” and you will find someone who finds that environement stiffling. One of the problems with evolving societies, is that sometimes elites or groups stop fulfilling an “organic” purpose — as part of the system — and start being “alienated” from the body of which they are part. When this happens, they may loose connection with general society and even with time become a body apart from the general body. Thus Marx could talk comfortably about the behavior of rich people during his time; “the capitolist class.”
But one can equally talk about the development of an alienated intellectual class which lost its role as leaders of general society and eventually came to actually oppose that society. For instance instead of artists being the heros and leaders of their societies, many of them came to see themselves either as esoteric rebels (embracing secret wisdoms) with art so incomprehensible that the hoi-poi could not possibly understand it — or as “sell-outs” caving for monetary gain. Instead of leading society such artists became an “alienated class of people” seeking to distance themselves from it. When elites do this, they become disfunction and both the artists and those who have to endure their so-called art. Suffer.
Enough for now.