In quite sharp tone, Parkin argues that Marxist theories of social class were marked by fundamental deficiencies, particularly associated with the ambiguous status of their central explanatory concept, mode of production.
[7] He attacks the Marxists' overemphasis on deep levels of structure, at the expense of social actors, and suggests a radical recasting of the theory of class and stratification.
The bourgeoisie could be identified, he held, by their reliance on exclusionary closure, as opposed to, say, their ownership of the means of production.
Similarly, a subordinate class would be identified by their reliance on usurpationary closure: Parkin's works, at least those from the late '70s and onwards, are notable for their lively discursive tone, frequently using sarcasm and irony in driving home their points.
Dennis Wrong called it a "bitingly witty and incisive assault on the sociological pretensions of western academic Marxism".
[13] Gavin Mackenzie called it "a beautifully written, savage and supremely witty attack" on Marxism: "I haven't laughed so much since ethnomethodology".