In Victorian Britain the class in power differed from the economically dominant class

Evidence

When Marx examined British politics in the series of articles for the New York Daily Tribune which he commenced in 1852, he had to confront the stubborn fact that, though the capitalist mode of production was fast developing, and with it an emergent industrial bourgeoisie, the latter appeared to “rule” either through a Tory party, representing the large landed proprietors, or through the Whig party, consisting of “the oldest, richest, and most arrogant portion of English landed property,” “the aristocratic representatives … of the industrial and commercial middle class.” To them, apparently, the bourgeoisie had abandoned the “monopoly of government and the exclusive possession of office.” How capital advanced through this complex political configuration—giving rise to a distinction between an “economically ruling class” and, at the level of the political superstructures, a “politically governing caste”—was a fundamental problem; for the dynamic of British politics (and the politics of the working class, which remained tied to the tail of the Whig-Radical alliance) was constantly mediated—deflected—through its structure (Surveys from Exile ). — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 511

Categorization

• DEFINE: Introduces the distinction between an ‘economically ruling class’ and a ‘politically governing caste’ that Marx drew from observing Britain.
• XREF: Connects to Gramsci’s later concept of hegemony and the idea of ruling blocs, which Stuart Hall himself develops in his own political theory.