Is it perfectly reasonable to say that? If you have evidence I'd be more than willing to go through it. Most people do not control production and even the smal

Is it perfectly reasonable to say that? If you have evidence I'd be more than willing to go through it. Most people do not control production and even the small amount who do control production make their decisions according to their material interests (not evil or twisted morals). Those who do not control production must work for those who do in exchange of money. These two groups' economic interests as a whole contradict themselves even though they are locked into a social relationship. These relationships change based on the development of production. This is the basis of social classes in marxism. Its not just imagination. No other theory has explained the progression of society in such a complete way. Some just talk about ideas, others about the qualities of great men but none can profoundly explain progress on a material basis. I've seen both sides of the coin while it seems you've only imagined flipping it. "The materialist conception of history starts from the proposition that the production of the means to support human life and, next to production, the exchange of things produced, is the basis of all social structure; that in every society that has appeared in history, the manner in which wealth is distributed and society divided into classes or orders is dependent upon what is produced, how it is produced, and how the products are exchanged. From this point of view, the final causes of all social changes and political revolutions are to be sought, not in men's brains, not in men's better insights into eternal truth and justice, but in changes in the modes of production and exchange."