What is the real root of class struggles?

What I found extremely interesting about one of Durkheim's arguments was that he did not blame poverty for the growing animosity between the classes beginning in the 17th century; he pegged the reason for the conflict on something profoundly different.  Durkheim says that conflict was rare before the seventeenth century due to the smaller size of the industrial firms; "The workman everywhere lived side by side with his master, sharing in his work 'in the same shop, on the same bench'... Both were almost equal to each other; he who had completed his apprenticeship could, at least in many trades, set up on his own, if he had the wherewithal." The implication here is that the workman, though with less material means than his master, was content because he felt like an integral part of the company.

The problem came in the seventeenth century, when an increase in the size of most firms meant that "the workman became even more separated from his boss."  With increasing specialization, it was harder for the worker to see exactly what his work was for i.e. the outcome or final product, and therefore his work became far less meaningful.  Durkheim puts this in a very morose light: "Each individual has his function, and the system of the division of labour makes some progress." Yet, the workers's "work was completely distinct" from the object of the firm at large.  It is this incongruity then that Durkheim blames for the growing worker dissatisfaction.

Relating this to today's world, I was reading a very interesting article in the WSJ this weekend about how modern companies "tend to herd customers as if they were cattle."  In essence, customers are generally viewed as an unintelligent mass to be exploited.  However, this is quickly changing thanks in part to the rise of the smartphone.  Users are now empowered because they can scan a barcode for a product and find ten different prices for it, and if one store is overcharging significantly, customers may flock away from that store because they feel disrespected.  This is bringing about a shift of focus in marketing campaigns to view the customers as real people, able to call your bluff if you treat them unfairly and hurt your business.

This in a sense is very similar to the source of the discontent of the workers of large industry starting in the seventeenth century.  The workers wanted to be seen as people, not as cogs in a machine to manufacture something, the details of which they were completely left in the dark on.  This logic works backwards from "At the same time as specialization becomes greater, revolts become more frequent"; as personal empowerment, or in this case feeling like you are a significant part of the end product brings greater harmony.

So do you guys agree with Durkheim?  Is it not poverty that brings about the discontent and conflict with the upper classes, but being treated as less important inferiors?  Or is this simply nonsense, and do you believe that poor people are naturally better as an intrinsic part of being poor, and so these conflicts would arise no matter what because of a discrepancy in the spread of wealth?


I have included the link to the article I mentioned below.  It is a very fascinating read, so definitely take a look at it if you have some time.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444873204577535352521092154.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTTopStories