SOCIOLOGY OPTIONAL, Paper-1, Chapter-6
Social Stratification
Syllabus- Concepts-hierarchy, inequality, and stratification; theories of stratification-Marx, Davis and Moore, and Melvin Tumin’s critique; forms and functions; class: different conceptions of class; class-in-itself and class-for-itself; caste and class; caste as a class.
SOCIAL STRATIFICATION
Social stratification is a process through which groups and social categories are ranked as higher or lower than one another in terms of their relative position on the scales of prestige, wealth, and power.
Inequality
The persistence of inequality and the quest for equality is the essence of human society universally.
Differences between individuals or groups are a universal characteristic. They simply denote the presence of diversity. But when such differences are attached to values and the preferability of certain traits is defined and ranked, social inequality is created. A stratification is a particular form of social inequality. It refers to the presence of distinct social groups which are ranked one above the other in terms of power, prestige, and wealth. Those who belong to a particular stratum will have some awareness of common interests and a common identity. For example, traditional Hindu society was divided into five main strata, four varnas, and the fifth group of the outcasts or untouchables.
Social inequality study is the foundation of the interdisciplinarity of social sciences.
Plato acknowledged that inequality was inevitable. However, he was opposed to the inheritance of class status. Aristotle was opposed to granting citizenship status to women and slaves. Machiavelli advocated that inequality in a situation is legitimate so long as there has been equality of opportunity to become unequal. Von Stein in’ Origin of Ranks’ attributes different capabilities to natural differences.
Marx sees inequality as a source of social conflict and social change. Rousseau believes that biologically based inequalities are small and relatively unimportant, whereas socially created inequalities provide the major basis for systems of social stratification. Tocqueville vouches for competitive inequality as against perpetual inequality.
Louis Dumont in “Homo Hierachicus” states that inequality in India is a way of life, which was hereditary and perpetuated by the occupational division of labor.
There are two ways to measure social inequality - inequality of conditions and inequality of opportunities. It is seen that inequality is built into the social structure and hence often passed down from generation to generation, perpetuating both forms of inequalities.
Andre Beteille talks of the distributive dimension of inequality and relational dimension of inequality and finds two systems of stratification:
1. A harmonic system of stratification is one in which the norms and values of society legitimize social inequality.
2. Disharmonic system of stratification is the one in which norms and values of society prescribe equality but in reality, there is inequality.
Functionalists like Parsons believe that inequality is inevitable and desirable and plays an important function in society. Conflict theorists, on the other hand, view inequality as resulting from groups with power dominating less powerful groups.
David Marsland sees inequality as a desirable feature of society because it rewards unequal effort and ability, and in doing so, creates incentives for people to work harder. Inequality is dynamic and contextual and can be: bridgeable or unbridgeable, temporal or permanent, contemporary or historic. In any society, the ideology of equality and the persistence of inequality coexist mutually.
Hierarchy
The concept of hierarchy denotes that people in a society are graded or ranked differently depending upon the type of statuses that they occupy, according to some criterion of evaluation accepted as relevant within the system.
Hierarchy is derived from the word “ hierarcha” which means having rule in holy things or among the holy ones.” Thus, it donates a social arrangement that attains a divine legitimation. It goes beyond the human agencial power and results in a rigid or fixed arrangement. It is usually an ascription-based, closed system, marked by social and cultural reproduction.
CH Cooley states that the Varna system of the early Vedic period appears to be an open class system of stratification. The ‘Divine origin theory’ made it a closed system, resulting in the social hierarchy. Similarly, the estate system of medieval Europe, was viewed as divinely ordained and hence hierarchical.
Weber does not subscribe to the divine origin belief and states that there are three axes of stratification in any society - power, prestige, and wealth. However, when the other two axes are dependent and derived from the third axis, the society will effectively contain a single axis of stratification. This will result in a rigid and hierarchical system.
According to Louis Dumont, hierarchy is a feature of a social system where normative principles determine the utilitarian and instrumental principles in the affairs of the society.
Dipankar Gupta elaborates that a capitalist or open market system is prone to become hierarchical. If health and education are left in the hands of market forces, people in the lower classes will have limited access to avail the best of these services. Thus, they will have little opportunity to improve their class, status, or party position.
Gerhard Lenski also talks about two related and important concepts:
1. Status crystallization - is the situation where an individual or a group is high or low on all three dimensions of social rewards (traditional caste system) - strict hierarchy and stability.
2. Status inconsistency - results when an individual or a group is high on one dimension, but low on another (caste system in modern India) - dispersed hierarchy and can create conflicts.
Thus, hierarchy is marked by exclusion and inclusion whereas stratification is marked by differences and inequalities. Within a stratification system, the hierarchy may be present and vice versa.
NOTE
According to the sociologists, hierarchy prevailed in societies based on castes or estates and social inequalities were legitimated as naturally given. Stratification, on the other hand, is a feature of modern industrial societies in which inequalities do exist but are not considered as a part of natural or divine order. In this process of social change, inequality did not vanish or reduce but changed its nature.
Bottomore - 4 forms of social stratification - slavery, estates, caste, and class.
Pierre Bourdieu - social resources can be divided into 4 forms of capital - economic (material assets and income), cultural (educational qualifications and status), social (network of contacts and social associations), and symbolic (social status and good reputation).
Rousseau - men are born free and equal but everywhere they are in chains - A discourse on the origin of inequality.
All-natural inequalities are not translated into social inequalities - no societies can proclaim to be completely equal - tolerable inequality - in the welfare of the whole society.
Plato - inequality is inevitable. The society that he envisioned is explicitly meant to be class structured so that all citizens belong to one of the three classes - ruling, non-ruling, auxiliaries, or workers. He eliminated inheritance of class status and provided equality of opportunity regardless of birth - men of gold, men of silver, men of iron - ruler, traders and adventurers, commoners - non-interchangeable roles - by birth different degrees of qualities.
Aristotle - very rich, very poor, moderate - 3 classes, inequality in birth, strength, and wealth.
St. Thomas and St. Augustine - distinctions based on power, property, and prestige.
Thomas Hobbes - Everyone wants power and privileges - chaos, so need rules - "Social Contract" under which people give the right to one man to rule, who has collective desire and will.
CW Mills - power elites theory.
JS Mills - gave credence to education, only the educated should get the right to citizenship.
RH Tawney - perfected equality is not realistic. It is dysfunctional as an individual's merit will not be recognized and is bad for society. Depending on the means and facilities available, one should go for practical equality.
Social Inequality is the result of differentiation, universal, normally built into the social structure, a source of social conflict and social change, normally sustained by the power of ideas (dominant class ideology), not necessarily based on natural or biological inequalities.
Goran Therborn - social consequence of inequalities is a violation of human dignity, denial of possibility for everybody's human capabilities to develop.
Gerhard Lenski - inequality of one kind converts to other areas also.
Wilkinson and Pickett - inequality in society is not only harmful to the individual but is also dysfunctional for society as a whole.
Raymond Aron - the absence of economic inequality in society does not imply death or complete absence of inequality in society. Inequality exists in multiple forms.
Kerr and Bernard - the concept of embourgeoisement by the welfare state and better conditions of workers.
In Socialist states like USSR - economic inequality was replaced by political inequality and - rule of oligarchs. Welfare states like India see an interventionist approach by the state to redistribute benefits. Does not cause equality, but makes inequality more bearable.
Political inequality is institutionalized in socialism and economic inequality in capitalism.
Hierarchy refers to any relationship of individuals, groups, or classes involving a system of ranking - ranking of statuses within a society according to some criteria of evaluation accepted as relevant within the system.
The exercise of power and authority and the control of people and resources become organized in a hierarchical way - bureaucracy.
Social Exclusion - Refers to the ways in which individuals may become cut off from full involvement in the wider community.
Theories of stratification-Marx, Davis and Moore, and Melvin Tumin’s critique
Structural Functionalist Theories
Functionalist theories assume that society has certain basic needs or functional prerequisites that must be met if it is to survive. They assume that the parts of society form an integrated whole, whose stability and order need to be maintained. They are concerned with the role of social stratification in the integration and continuance of society. Social stratification is viewed as a dynamic system characterized by social mobility and continual restructuring of the rules of consensus building. They recognize the role of competition and conflict but also postulates the existence of institutional mechanism like socialization, education, empowerment by democratic participation, etc. through which aspirations of social mobility may be realized. These theories postulate an analogy between social order and an organism - both have internal mechanisms for self-regulation and self-correction.
Kingsley Davis and Wilbert E. Moore: - article ‘Some principles of Stratification’
They argue that all social systems share certain functional prerequisites which must be met if the system is to survive and operate efficiently. One such prerequisite is effective role allocation and performance. This means that:
1. All roles must be filled.
2. They must be filled by those best able to perform them.
3. The necessary training for them must be undertaken.
4. The roles must be performed conscientiously.
All Societies need some mechanism for ensuring effective role allocation and performance. This mechanism is social stratification, which they saw as a system that attaches unequal rewards and privileges to the different positions in society.
People differ in terms of their innate ability and talent, and positions differ in terms of their importance for the survival and maintenance of society. A major function of stratification is to match the most able people with the functionally most important positions. It does this by attaching high rewards to those positions. The desire for such rewards motivates people to compete for them, and in theory, the most talented will win through. Such positions usually require long periods of training that involve certain sacrifices, such as loss of income. The promise of high rewards is necessary to provide an incentive to encourage people to undergo this training and to compensate them for the sacrifice involved. The high rewards also provide the necessary inducement and generate the required motivation for diligent and conscientious role performance.
The functional importance of any position can be measured in two ways:
1. The degree to which a position is functionally unique.
2. The degree to which other positions are dependent on it.
Thus, stratification is a social necessity to place and motivate individuals, and contribute to the maintenance and well-being of the social system.
Melvin M. Tumin: - a critique of Davis and Moore
1. Functional importance - there is no objective way of measuring the functional importance of positions. Many occupations which afford little prestige or economic reward can be seen as vital to society. Example: garbage collectors.
2. Power and rewards - Davis and Moore ignored the influence of power on the unequal distribution of rewards. Differences in pay and prestige between occupational groups may be due to differences in their power rather than their functional importance.
3. The pool of talent - Davis, and Moore assumed that only a limited number of individuals have the talent to acquire the skills necessary for the functionally most important positions. This is a questionable assumption as:
a. An effective method of measuring talent and ability has yet to be devised.
b. The pool of talent in society may be considerably larger than assumed. As a result, unequal rewards may not be necessary to harness it.
4. Training - Tumin rejects the view that the training required for important positions should be regarded as a sacrifice and therefore in need of compensation. He pointed to the rewards of being a student - leisure, freedom, and the opportunity for self-development. He also noted that any loss of earnings can usually be made up during the first ten years of work and continuing high pay after that may not be justified.
5. Motivation - he argues that social stratification does not serve the function of motivating talented individuals, but rather it acts as a barrier to the motivation and recruitment of talent. The hurdles which people from lower strata need to overcome in order to succeed can be daunting and can discourage rather than motivate people. Davis and Moore also failed to consider the possibility that those who occupy highly rewarded positions erect barriers to recruitment. Occupational groups often use their power to restrict access to their positions, so creating a high demand for their services and increasing the rewards they receive.
6. Inequality of opportunity - those born into the lower strata can never have the same opportunities for realizing their talents as those born into the higher strata.
7. Social Division- Differential rewards can encourage hostility, suspicion, and distrust among the various segments of society. Hence, Stratification is a divisive rather than an integrating force.
He concludes by stating that functionalists have tended to ignore or downplay many of the dysfunctions of stratification.
Davis & Moore’s Arguments
1. Tumin seeks to demolish the concept of institutionalized inequality but he offers no explanation of the universality of stratified inequality.
2. Their interest lies in understanding why stratification exists in society, while Tumin argues that stratification does not have to exist.
3. He underestimates the importance of the specialized division of labor that is essential for a complex industrial society.
Marxist Theory
It regards stratification as divisive rather than an integrative structure.
1. Classes - A class is a social group whose members share the same relationship to the means of production. In all stratified societies, there are two major social groups: a ruling class (bourgeoisie) and a subject class (proletariat). The power of the ruling class comes from its ownership and control of the means of production
2. Classes and historical epochs - Marx believed that western society had developed through four main epochs. Primitive communism is the first epoch and the only example of a classless society, while the other epochs all saw two major classes:
a. ancient society - master and slave
b. feudal society - lord and serf
c. capitalist society - capitalist and wage laborer
During these epochs, the labor power required for production was supplied by the subject class who were in majority. Classes emerged when the productive capacity of society expanded beyond the level required for subsistence when agriculture became the dominant mode of production. Increasingly, a more complex and specialized division of labor has occurred. Surplus wealth and private property form the basis of class societies.
3. Dependency and conflict - while the classes are mutually dependent, it is not a relationship of equal reciprocity. Instead, it is a relationship between exploiter and exploited. The ruling class gains at the expense of the subject class and there is, therefore, a conflict of interest between them.
4. Power and the superstructure - political power comes from economic power. The superstructure of society - the major institutions, values, and belief systems - is seen to be shaped by the economic infrastructure. The various parts of the superstructure are hence seen as instruments of ruling-class domination and oppression of the subject class.
5. Class struggle - is the driving force of social change. The proletariat would overthrow the bourgeoisie and seize the means of production, the source of power. It would transform the capitalist society by replacing private property with the communally owned property.
6. Class consciousness - will occur when the false consciousness is replaced by a full awareness of the true nature of exploitation and contradictions. This will transform the proletariat from a class-in-itself to a class-for-itself.
7. Polarization of the classes - the gap between the proletariat and bourgeoisie will widen and hasten the downfall of the capitalist economy. This will be caused by the obliteration of the differences in labor (homogenization of the working class), the pauperization of the proletariat, and the sinking of the petty bourgeoisie into the proletariat.
Marx had believed that the process of polarization had begun in 19th century Britain and soon the proletariat revolution and dawn of communist utopia would occur.
Critique
Weber argued against economic determinism and proposed the trinitarian model consisting of class, status, and party. He also states that there could be numerous divisions between the two classes, depending upon the market situation of individuals.
Ralf Dahrendorf in ‘ Class and Class Conflict in industrial Society’ views Marx’s ideas as relevant in 19th century Europe. However, he sees the 20th century as a decomposition of both - capital (example: multiple shareholders) and labor (example: even managers do not own capital, but neither are the working class as they hold substantial authority). He also sees increasing social mobility and a widening middle class.
Gramsci argues that the ruling class could not depend on false consciousness and instead will need to make real concessions to other groups in society in order to win their support.
0 Comments
please do not enter any spam link in the comment box.