of industry and workers' leaders. He argues that when choosing a strategy to maximise the material wealth of the working class, the leaders of the proletariat may choose to support capitalism, rather than challenge it. This is because of the possibility of a loss of wealth during the transition to the dictatorship of the proletariat, even though material wealth would improve dramatically after the transition. The proletariat, then, chooses to continue the capitalist dominance of society in the hope of uninterrupted growth of material wealth. This runs counter to the Marxist idea of 'irreconcilable classes'. Under this thesis, dominance is agreed upon by the proletariat, rather than forced upon them. The state is acting in the interests of both the dominant and dominated class by enforcing the compromise. On the other hand, it can be seen that it is acting in the long-term interests of the bourgeoisie, by placating the working class, and only in the short-term interests of the proletariat, by only considering immediate growth in their material wealth. By only considering the short-term interests of the proletariat, this can hardly be called a balanced or unbiased state. Frank Parkin proposes the notion that the Marxist theory of the state, as dominated by class, is narrow-minded. He shows examples of the South African and the Orange state where the dominant divisions are race and religion respectively. He suggests an alternative 'Closure Model', where 'the state as an agency buttresses and consolidates the rules and institutions of exclusion governing all