bundle- Russian conceptual analogue of the term recognized in world sociology " stratification"- reflects the development process social inequality and hierarchical grouping of people at social levels that differ from each other prestige, property and power.
Evaluation, attribution of people to certain social strata is carried out according to the following main criteria:
- qualitative characteristics of members of society, which are determined by genetic traits and prescribed statuses (origin, family ties, personal qualities and abilities)
- role characteristics, which are determined by the set of roles that an individual performs in society (position, level of professionalism, level of knowledge, etc.);
- characteristics of possession of material and spiritual values (money, means of production, works of art, opportunities for spiritual and ideological influence on other strata of society, etc.).
The listed reasons constitute, as it were, a series of homogeneous foundations of social stratification:
Firstly, the growth in the number of people in contact requires a specific organization and coordination of joint activities.
Secondly, the diversity and heterogeneity of united people stimulate social inequality and increase stratification.
Thirdly, the very stability of social associations necessitates differentiation, because maintaining the stability of a group requires energy and narrowly focused activity.
Fourth, the unification of people into a community gives rise to their spontaneous self-differentiation as an inevitable way to maintain the organization.
Fifth, inequality and stratification are generated by the functional distribution of activities in the community.
Social inequality are the conditions under which people have unequal access to social goods such as money, power and prestige. Differences between people, due to their physiological and mental characteristics, are called natural. Natural differences can become the basis for the emergence of unequal relationships between individuals. The strong coerce the weak, who triumph over the simpletons. Inequality resulting from natural differences is the first form of inequality. However, the main feature of society is social inequality, inextricably linked with social differences.
Those differences are called social, which are generated social factors: division of labor(workers of mental and physical labor), way of life(urban and rural population), social roles(father, enemy, politician), etc. Social differences can be superimposed on natural ones when, for example, an intelligent, talented person becomes a scientist. There are exceptions when physically weak people gain strength through weapons.
Inequality in society is viewed from two sides. Firstly as a property of society. Written history knows no societies without social inequality. The struggle of people, parties, groups, classes is a struggle for the possession of greater opportunities, rights, advantages and privileges. If inequality is an inherent property of society, then it carries a positive functional load. And society reproduces inequality because it needs it as a source of development. Secondly, inequality is always perceived as an unequal relationship between people, groups, so it becomes natural to seek to find the origins of this unequal position in the peculiarities of a person’s position in society: professional status in the possession of property, power, in the personal qualities of individuals. This approach has now become widespread primarily because of its focus on real actions, interests that are amenable to observation and analysis.
Inequality has many faces and manifests itself in various parts of a single social organism: in the family, in an institution, in small and large social groups. It is necessary condition organization of social life.
Introduction……………………………………………………………….….3
1. The essence of social stratification……………………….……….5
2. Social stratification of society in Russia………………………….6
2.1. The position of the social lower classes……………………………………….6
2.2.Large owners - rent-seeking business elite……..…9
2.3.Russian bureaucracy………………………………………….11
2.4. Middle layers…………………………….…………………….…….13
Conclusion……………………………………………………………….18
List of used literature…………..……………………….20
Introduction
The approach proposed in this paper to the problem of social inequality in post-Soviet society is based on the concept that the social structure modern Russia is considered as a direct continuation of the etacratic system that existed in the USSR. Its fundamental principle was relations of the “power-property” type, social differentiation was of a non-class nature and was determined by ranks in the power hierarchy. Unlike most Eastern European countries, Russia has not undergone a radical turn towards a competitive privately owned economy. The merged relations “power-property” inherent in a statist society received a private-property shell, but essentially remained unchanged. During the reforms, the administrative-command nomenklatura, the only social group in Soviet society that had conscious interests and self-identification, retained control positions in power, secured the predominant part of state property during privatization, and transformed into a large quasi-bourgeoisie. All attempts to carry out non-nomenklatura privatization, that is, privatization that was not controlled by the politically ruling groups, were frustrated. To the benefit of policy-forming business, small and medium businesses were pushed to the periphery of the economy and stagnated throughout the 1990s and early 2000s, and the relationship of incomplete privatization and non-transparency of property turned out to be mothballed.
Thus, in post-Soviet Russia, statism has been preserved in a transformed form, which has acquired the form of state-monopoly corporatist (nomenklatura-bureaucratic) quasi-capitalism, and not democratic, socially oriented capitalism, as, say, in the Czech Republic, Poland, Slovenia, Estonia. In this socio-economic system, a peculiar type of social stratification has developed in the form of an interweaving of the estate hierarchy and elements of class differentiation, which has been steadily reproducing in recent years.
In connection with the foregoing, the purpose of this work is to consider the social stratification of society in Russia.
Tasks: to reveal the essence of social stratification, to consider the social stratification of society in Russia.
1. The essence of social stratification
social stratification is the same as social stratification. The term "stratification" literally means the division of the whole society into layers, i.e. groups of the rich, prosperous, wealthy, poor and very poor, or beggars.
Social stratification is the process of formation of layers among the population and its result. The starting point of this process is a socially homogeneous society, that is, a society in which people do not differ in property and social status. In Latin, it corresponds to two terms accepted in the modern science of sociology - differentiation and stratification.
The term "stratification" is accepted in science, and the word "stratification" is used more in everyday language and only sometimes in science. The fact is that "stratification" is most often used for one phenomenon - the division of society into poor and rich. The numerous middle class is not covered by this concept. Therefore, stratification reflects reality more fully. It captures not only the process of polarization of the population into poor and rich, but also the end result of stratification, when a middle class appears in society.
Stratification describes social inequality in society, the division into rich and poor, privileged and unprivileged.
Each layer (stratum) includes only those people who have approximately the same income, power, education and prestige. From top to bottom in society are the strata of the rich, wealthy (middle class) and poor people.
Large social strata are also called the masses within which we can find smaller subdivisions, which, in fact, are called layers, or strata.
The rich class is divided into upper (very rich, billionaires) and lower (just rich, millionaires) layers. The middle class is made up of three strata, and the lower, or poor, class is made up of two. Sociologists call its lowest layer the underclass, or the social bottom.
So, social stratification- a set of vertically arranged social strata: poor, prosperous, rich Social strata are located here according to the criterion of unequal access to power, wealth, education and prestige. Strata- the social stratum of people with similar objective indicators on four scales of stratification.
2. Social stratification of society in Russia
2.1.The position of the social classes
The emerging (perhaps already established) society in the industrial countries is characterized by an unprecedented gap between poverty and wealth. M. Goldman, professor at Harvard University, noting that “the system that has taken shape in Russia has absorbed all the worst of capitalism and communism”, expressed particular concern about the “extremely uneven distribution of income between the rich “new Russians” and the rest of the population.”
The property stratification of the population sharply increased, and significant sections of the so-called new poor appeared. Real average monthly wages (in 1991 prices) in 1991-1998 decreased from 548 rubles. up to 193 rubles, that is, almost three times. At the same time, the ratio of the average wages to the subsistence minimum, respectively, fell from 3.16 to 1.7, i.e., almost twice. After the 1998 financial crisis, wages fell again. In terms of real consumption, the population additionally lost about a third. Such data are summarized by Academician D. Lvov. According to the State Statistics Committee, the real accrued wages per worker in July 1999 amounted to 64.5% of July of the previous year (that is, before the August 1998 crisis). Let me add the following commentary by analysts from the Russian-European Center for Economic Policy: “In the first quarter of 1999, real wages (estimated using the consumer spending deflator) reached their lowest level in the entire 1990s and amounted to about 50% of the level of 1990, i.e., 30% below the level of 1997. Even in 2001, after a two-year economic recovery, wages were only slightly higher than two-thirds of the miserable level of 1990, which at one time aroused the just indignation of future reformers. It should be noted that in 2001-2003 the growth of real wages continued and approached the level of 1990. However, it should be borne in mind that the total amount of wages is still about 30% of GDP, while in developed capitalist countries it reaches at least 60% of it... For 1 dollar of wages, a Russian worker produces 4.6 dollars of products, and an American - 1.7 dollars.
If we take into account the growing differentiation of the population in terms of living standards during these same years, it is not difficult to imagine the situation not only of the social lower classes, but also of the so-called middle strata. It can be noted that the dynamics of income under consideration was favorable for the population during the period of the struggle between the parliament and the executive branch (1992-1994) and acquired a positive character after the stabilization of Putin's presidency.
The reasons for these phenomena are not limited to miscalculations in the development of the economy. There has been a huge contraction in the country of militaristic spending, the cost of maintaining "friendly" regimes abroad, subventions to the former Soviet republics, and so on, that is, most of the costs of the past. Why do the spending items of the federal and regional budgets for social purposes look so miserable, why has the standard of living of the majority of the population fallen so much? After all, Russia is a country with a unique amount of natural resources included in economic life.
It is important to take into account that the post-Soviet elite is not capable and does not seek to represent national interests. This is due, on the one hand, to its continuity in relation to the Soviet nomenklatura, and on the other hand, to the absence in the country (unlike, for example, of Poland or Hungary) of traditions of mass opposition activity and the formation of counter-elite groups in society. The underdevelopment of civil society and the legal protection of citizens have led to the fact that the Russian elite is not yet characterized by citizenship and state thinking; it can only solve its short-term problems. Her lack of interest in resolving the situation with the tragic impoverishment of the majority of fellow citizens is explained by the syndrome of people who quickly got rich, who care only about themselves and their surroundings. This set of values largely predetermines not only the essence, but the form and methods of implementing social policy.
At this stage of Russia's existence, only the state can ensure a fair and socially acceptable distribution of benefits from a market economy. For this, first of all, we need: the implementation of the law on the subsistence minimum, which eliminates the mass impoverishment of the population; preventing the increase in pensions from lagging behind inflation rates; a sharp increase in state appropriations for education, science, and health care; state regulation prices and quality medical services and medicines.
As a complex of social groups that are strikingly different from each other, sociologists must answer the question of how to distinguish these groups from each other. Stratification studies this issue in social science. This is a system of verified features, according to which an individual is assigned to a certain group. It is about this social phenomenon that we will talk today.
Theory of stratification
In order to be able to distinguish between social groups, as well as to study them, the theory of social stratification was developed in the early 40s of the twentieth century. T. Parsons, R. Merton, K. Davis, W. Moore worked on its creation. Sociologists assured that stratification in social science is a process that was provoked by the spread of executable functions necessary for the life of society. According to them, due to social stratification in society, it is possible to distinguish ordered layers that were formed on the basis of important features.
It should also not be forgotten that the approach of social stratification is both a method and methodology for studying the social structure of society. It is based on the principles:
- Mandatory research of all public spending.
- The need to apply the same criteria in a comparative analysis.
- Applying a sufficient number of criteria that will allow for a deep analysis of the social stratum.
About stratification
The concept of "stratification" was taken from geology by Pitirim Sorokin. In social science, stratification is a process of social reproduction, during which all layers, classes, castes and groups are unequal, therefore they are forced to be placed in a hierarchical order. In other words, social stratification is the division of society into different groups people who share the same characteristics. The main criteria for stratification in social science are the level of income, access to power and knowledge, the nature of work, and leisure activities.
Thus, economic, professional and political stratification are distinguished. But that's not all, stratification in social science is a source that allows you to determine sustainable elements public structure. In the course of historical development, three types of stratification were formed.
castes
One of these types are castes. Literally translated from Portuguese, this word means "origin". That is, castes are understood as closed groups that are connected by origin and status. To become a member of this association, you need to be born in it, moreover, there is no possibility for representatives of different castes to marry. Simply put, the caste system is very limited, this is a place for those who are just lucky.
The most famous caste system is considered to be an example of stratification in India. According to legend, society was originally divided into 4 varnas, which were created from different parts of the body, symbolizing a person. So, the “mouths” of the society were brahmins (priests and scholars). The "hands" were kshatriyas (leaders and soldiers). The role of the "torso" was played by vaishyas (merchants and villagers), and the "feet" were considered sudras (dependent persons).
Estates
Another type of stratification in social science is called "estate". This is a special group of people whose rules of conduct, duties and rights are inherited. In contrast to the caste system, it is easier to become part of a certain estate, since this is a conscious choice of a person, and not the result of a fatal combination of circumstances. In the countries of Europe of the 18th-19th centuries, the following system of estates existed:
- Nobility - groups of people with special privileges, they were usually given different titles, such as duke, baron, prince, etc.
- Clergy - if you exclude the priests, then all the rest who served the church were considered clergy. In turn, it was divided into two types: "black" - all the monastic brethren, "white" - non-monastic people who remained faithful to church dogmas.
- Merchants - a cohort of people engaged in trade.
- Peasantry - people whose basis of labor activity was agriculture and agricultural labor.
- Philistinism - groups of people who live in cities, are engaged in crafts, trade or are in the service.
Classes
The definition of stratification in social science is impossible without the concept of "class". By class is meant a group of people that is distinguished by freedom of access to property. For the first time such a concept was introduced into social science by Karl Marx, he said that the position of an individual in society is determined by his access to material goods. This is how class disparities arose. If we look at specific historical examples, then only two classes were defined in the slave-owning community: slaves and their masters. The main strata of feudal society were the feudal lords and the peasants dependent on them.
However, in modern sociological sciences, classes are groups of individuals who are similar according to the criteria of political, economic, and socio-cultural affiliation. Therefore, in every modern society we can distinguish:
- Upper class (elite or rich people).
- Middle class (professionals in their field, employees, workers with qualifications).
- Lower class (unskilled workers, marginalized).
- Underclass (people at the very "bottom" of the system).
strata
Thus, we can say that the units of social stratification are strata - groups of people who are united according to a certain attribute. The concept of "stratum" is the most universal term that can be used to characterize both large classes of people and small groups that are united according to one criterion.
As for examples of stratification in social science, these can be representatives of the elite and the masses. As Pareto said, in every society there are 20% of the elite - people who lead the social order and prevent the emergence of anarchy. And 80% of the so-called mass - ordinary people who do not have access to public authority.
Stratification is the criterion that is an indicator of the inequality that prevails in society. The division into groups shows how different conditions people live in society. They have different potential and access to social benefits. But in spite of everything, it is only through stratification that a detailed characterization of the social structure can be obtained.
Mobility
In social science, social stratification and mobility are inextricably linked concepts. Mobility refers to dynamic change. As Pitirim Sorokin said: “Social mobility is the process of moving an individual or another object (norm, value) to a different social plane.”
For example, a person can change his position in society, and at the same time begin to belong to another class. good example quality social mobility maybe a trite story about how a poor guy became a millionaire.
Like social stratification, mobility has its varieties. First of all, vertical and horizontal mobility are distinguished.
Vertical mobility
Vertical mobility is a process that is characterized by changes that can be described as " better than that what was" or "worse than what was". For example, a person received a promotion at work, a salary increase, or a higher education. These are positive changes, which are called upward mobility.
An example of downward mobility would be a dismissal, a demotion, or any other situation that changes circumstances for the worse.
Horizontal mobility
In addition to vertical mobility, there is also horizontal dynamics. If in the first case a person had the opportunity to move within his stratum, then in this case he moves exclusively within his own stratum.
For example, a programmer changed his job and moved to another city. He still belongs to the middle class of the population, he just changed his territorial position. Or if a person changes the specifics of work without a significant increase in earnings. For example, he worked as a secretary, and became an assistant accountant. The specifics of the work seem to be different, there are more responsibilities, and the salary has not changed significantly. Therefore, we can say that mobility is considered horizontal if a person changes his social group to one that is located at the same level.
Intergenerational and intragenerational mobility
This concept is more common in the countries of America, in particular in the States, where the public is of the opinion that the next generation should live better than the previous one. And anarchy is understood not as anarchy, which Durkheim spoke of, but as a discrepancy between needs and resources.
Intergenerational mobility is determined by the process in which a child occupies a better or worse position in society than his parents. For example, if the parents were low-skilled workers and their child became a scientist, this is positive intergenerational mobility.
Intragenerational mobility is determined by the change in social status throughout the life span, regardless of the achievements of the parents.
Groups and people
Exploring the concepts of social mobility and stratification, it is difficult not to note such definitions as individual and group dynamics.
Group mobility deserves special attention - a dynamic process in which an entire estate, caste or class changes its position in society. For example, after the collapse of the USSR, when many factories stopped, engineers became unclaimed. A whole class of engineers was forced to change their specialization in a short time. This kind of mobility is a characteristic feature of societies that are in a state of total change.
With individual mobility, each person independently changes his belonging to a particular stratum.
conclusions
In general, studies show that social mobility is influenced by the political regime, the stages of modernization, and the socio-economic situation in the society. As well as the characteristics of the individual himself: his education, character, etc.
But what is stratification in social science? In simple words It is the division of society into rich and poor. And only then these rich and poor can be divided into strata with different characteristics. The social structure in any society is the main criterion that helps the society to evolve. Due to which strata prevail in a particular society, it is possible to determine which development strategy suits it best.
Social stratification is a central theme in sociology. It describes social inequality in society, the division of social strata by income level and lifestyle, by the presence or absence of privileges. In primitive society, inequality was insignificant, so stratification was almost absent there. In complex societies, inequality is very strong, it divided people by income, level of education, power. Castes arose, then estates, and later classes. In some societies, the transition from one social stratum (stratum) to another is prohibited; there are societies where such a transition is limited, and there are societies where it is completely allowed. Freedom of social movement (mobility) determines whether a society is closed or open.The term "stratification" comes from geology, where it refers to the vertical arrangement of the Earth's layers. Sociology has likened the structure of society to the structure of the Earth and placed the social strata (strata) also vertically. The basis is the income ladder: the poor are at the bottom, the wealthy are in the middle, and the rich are at the top.
The rich occupy the most privileged positions and have the most prestigious professions. As a rule, they are better paid and are associated with mental work, performance managerial functions. Leaders, kings, kings, presidents, political leaders, big businessmen, scientists and artists make up the elite of society. The middle class in modern society includes doctors, lawyers, teachers, qualified employees, the middle and petty bourgeoisie. To the lower strata - unskilled workers, the unemployed, the poor. The working class, according to modern ideas, is an independent group, which occupies an intermediate position between the middle and lower classes.
Income - the amount of cash receipts of an individual or family for a certain period of time (month, year). Income is the amount of money received in the form of wages, pensions, allowances, alimony, fees, deductions from profits. Incomes are most often spent on maintaining life, but if they are very high, they accumulate and turn into wealth.
Wealth - accumulated income, that is, the amount of cash or embodied money. In the second case, they are called movable (car, yacht, securities etc.) and immovable (house, works of art, treasures) property. Usually wealth is inherited. Inheritance can be received by both working and non-working, and only working people can receive income. In addition to them, pensioners and the unemployed have income, but the poor do not. The rich may or may not work. In both cases, they are owners because they have wealth. The main wealth of the upper class is not income, but accumulated property. The salary share is small. For the middle and lower classes, income is the main source of subsistence, since the first, if there is wealth, is insignificant, and the second does not have it at all. Wealth allows you not to work, and its absence forces you to work for the sake of wages.
The essence of power is the ability to impose one's will against the wishes of other people. In a complex society, power is institutionalized; protected by laws and tradition, surrounded by privileges and wide access to social benefits, allows you to make decisions that are vital for society, including laws that, as a rule, are beneficial to the upper class.
In all societies, people who hold some form of power—political, economic, or religious—make up an institutionalized elite. It determines the domestic and foreign policy of the state, directing it in a direction that is beneficial to itself, which other classes are deprived of.
Prestige is the respect that is enjoyed in public opinion by one or another profession, position, occupation. The profession of a lawyer is more prestigious than the profession of a steelworker or a plumber. Office of the President commercial bank more prestigious than the post of cashier. All professions, occupations and positions that exist in a given society can be placed from top to bottom on the ladder of professional prestige. We define professional prestige intuitively, roughly. But in some countries, primarily in the United States, sociologists measure it with the help of special methods. They study public opinion, compare different professions, analyze statistics and finally get an accurate scale of prestige. The first such study was conducted by American sociologists in 1947. Since then, they regularly measure this phenomenon and monitor how the prestige of basic professions in society changes over time. In other words, they build a dynamic picture.
Income, power, prestige and education determine the total socio-economic status, that is, the position and place of a person in society. In this case, the status acts as a generalized indicator of stratification. Previously, its key role in the social structure was noted. Now it turned out that he plays a crucial role in sociology as a whole. The assigned status characterizes a rigidly fixed system of stratification, that is, a closed society in which the transition from one stratum to another is practically prohibited. Such systems include slavery and caste system. The achieved status characterizes a mobile system of stratification, or an open society, where people are allowed to move freely up and down the social ladder. Such a system includes classes (capitalist society). Finally, feudal society, with its inherent estate structure, should be classified as an intermediate type, that is, a relatively closed system. Here, crossings are legally prohibited, but in practice they are not excluded. These are the historical types of stratification.
Social stratification of society
Social stratification (from Latin stratum - layer + facere - to make) is the differentiation of people in society depending on access to power, profession, income and some other socially significant features. The concept of "stratification" was proposed by the sociologist Pitirim Aleksandrovich Sorokin (1889-1968), who borrowed it from the natural sciences, where it, in particular, denotes the distribution of geological layers.The distribution of social groups and people by strata (layers) makes it possible to single out relatively stable elements of the structure of society in terms of access to power (politics) carried out professional functions and income received (economy). Three main types of stratification are presented in history - castes, estates and classes. Castes (from Portuguese casta - clan, generation, origin) are closed social groups connected by a common origin and legal status. Caste membership is determined solely by birth, and marriages between members of different castes are forbidden. The most famous is the caste system of India (table), originally based on the division of the population into four varnas (in Sanskrit, this word means “kind, genus, color”). According to legend, varnas were formed from different parts of the body of the primordial man, who was sacrificed.
Caste system in ancient India:
|
Representatives |
Associated body part |
||
|
Brahmins |
Scholars and priests |
||
|
Warriors and rulers |
|||
|
Peasants and merchants |
|||
|
"Untouchable", dependent persons |
Estates are social groups whose rights and obligations, enshrined in law and tradition, are inherited.
Below are the main estates characteristic of Europe in the 18th-19th centuries:
The nobility is a privileged estate from among the large landowners and veteran officials. An indicator of nobility is usually a title: prince, duke, count, marquis, viscount, baron, etc.;
clergy - ministers of worship and the church, with the exception of priests. In Orthodoxy, black clergy (monastic) and white (non-monastic) are distinguished;
merchant class - the trading class, which included the owners of private enterprises;
the peasantry - the class of farmers engaged in agricultural labor as the main profession;
philistinism - the urban class, consisting of artisans, small merchants and lower employees.
In some countries, a military estate was distinguished (for example, chivalry). In the Russian Empire, the Cossacks were sometimes referred to as a special estate. Unlike the caste system, marriages between members of different classes are permissible. It is possible (although difficult) to move from one class to another (for example, the purchase of the nobility by a merchant).
Classes (from lat. classis - category) are large groups of people that differ in their attitude to property. The German philosopher Karl Marx (1818-1883), who proposed a historical classification of classes, pointed out that an important criterion for distinguishing classes is the position of their members - oppressed or oppressed:
In a slave-owning society, these were slaves and slave-owners;
in feudal society - feudal lords and dependent peasants;
in a capitalist society - capitalists (bourgeoisie) and workers (proletariat);
there will be no classes in a communist society.
In modern sociology, one often speaks of classes in the most general sense - as collections of people with similar life chances, mediated by income, prestige and power:
Upper class: divided into upper upper class (rich people from "old families") and lower upper class (recently rich people);
middle class: divided into upper middle (professionals);
lower middle (skilled workers and employees); The lower class is divided into an upper lower class (unskilled workers) and a lower lower class (lumpen and marginals).
The lower lower class are population groups that, for various reasons, do not fit into the structure of society. In fact, their representatives are excluded from the social class structure, so they are also called declassed elements.
The declassed elements include lumpen - vagabonds, beggars, beggars, as well as outcasts - those who have lost their social characteristics and have not acquired a new system of norms and values in return, for example, former factory workers who lost their jobs due to the economic crisis, or peasants driven from the earth during industrialization.
Strata - groups of people with similar characteristics in the social space. This is the most universal and broadest concept, which makes it possible to single out any fractional elements in the structure of society according to a set of various socially significant criteria. For example, strata such as elite specialists, professional entrepreneurs, government officials, office workers, skilled workers, unskilled workers, etc. are distinguished. Classes, estates and castes can be considered varieties of strata.
Social stratification reflects the presence of inequality in society. It shows that strata exist in different conditions and people have different opportunities to meet their needs. Inequality is the source of stratification in society. Thus, inequality reflects differences in the access of representatives of each layer to social benefits, and stratification is a sociological characteristic of the structure of society as a set of layers.
Criteria of social stratification
Economic (according to the criteria of income and wealth);
political (according to the criteria of influence and power);
professional (according to the criteria of mastery, professional skills, successful performance of social roles).
Qualitative characteristics of people that they possess from birth (ethnicity, family ties, gender and age characteristics, personal qualities and abilities);
role characteristics determined by a set of roles performed by an individual in society (education, position, various types of professional and labor activity);
characteristics due to the possession of material and spiritual values (wealth, property, privileges, the ability to influence and manage other people, etc.).
Income - the amount of cash receipts for a certain period (month, year);
wealth - accumulated income, i.e. the amount of cash or embodied money (in the second case, they act in the form of movable or immovable property);
power - the ability and ability to exercise one's will, to exert a decisive influence on the activities of other people through various means (authority, law, violence, etc.). Power is measured by the number of people it extends to;
education - a set of knowledge, skills and abilities acquired in the learning process. The level of education is measured by the number of years of education;
prestige - a public assessment of the attractiveness, significance of a particular profession, position, a certain type of occupation.
Upper-upper class (representatives of influential and wealthy dynasties with significant resources of power, wealth and prestige);
lower-upper class (“new rich” - bankers, politicians who do not have a noble origin and did not have time to create powerful role-playing clans);
upper-middle class (successful businessmen, lawyers, entrepreneurs, scientists, managers, doctors, engineers, journalists, cultural and art workers);
lower-middle class (employees - engineers, clerks, secretaries, employees and other categories, which are commonly called "white collars");
upper-lower class (workers engaged mainly in physical labor);
lower-lower class (beggars, unemployed, homeless, foreign workers, declassed elements).
Social stratification and mobility
Social (stratification) structure, social differentiation - stratification and hierarchical organization of various strata of society, as well as a set of institutions and relations between them.The basis of the stratification structure of society is the natural and social inequality of people.
Social inequality - unequal access to social benefits.
Modern society strives to minimize social inequality, at the same time, natural inequality cannot be eliminated.
In sociology, four main types of social stratification are known:
Slavery,
caste,
estates,
classes.
The first three systems are considered closed, i.e. transition from one stratum to another is almost impossible or difficult. The class system is open, social mobility has been established.
There are two approaches to the study of society:
1. Stratification: divides society into strata based on lifestyle, income level, social prestige, involvement in power structures.
2. Class: divides society into classes, based on the place in the production system, attitude to ownership of the means of production, role in the social division of labor.
Since any social structure is a collection of all functioning social communities, taken in their interaction, the following elements can be distinguished in it:
A) ethnic structure (clan, tribe, nationality, nation);
b) demographic structure (groups are distinguished by age and sex);
c) settlement structure (urban residents, rural residents, etc.);
d) class structure (bourgeoisie, proletariat, peasants, etc.);
e) professional and educational structure.
In the most general form, three stratification levels can be distinguished in modern society:
Higher (large owners, officials, scientific and cultural elite);
medium (entrepreneurs, highly qualified specialists);
lower (low-skilled workers, unemployed).
The basis of modern society is the middle class.
A marginal is an individual who has lost his former social status, deprived of the opportunity to do his usual business and not adapted to the new stratum within which he exists.
The positive impact of the marginalized on society:
Marginals are prone to innovation and change;
marginals enrich the culture into which they bring elements of their former culture;
outcasts at the junction of two cultures create a new culture.
Bad influence:
Confusion and inability to act effectively in new circumstances;
destabilization of society;
inability to get used to new roles;
loss of old values and inability to accept new values, which leads to a kind of "spiritual vacuum".
Status is a certain position in the social structure of a group or society, associated with other positions through a system of rights and obligations.
Social status can be prescribed and acquired.
A person receives a prescribed (congenital) status at birth (family ties, gender, age).
Acquired (achieved) status is obtained during life (profession).
Mixed combines the features of prescribed and acquired status: something that did not depend on a person (unemployed, a person with disabilities) or maximum achievements in their field (professor, doctor of science, Olympic champion).
Status symbols are attributes by which you can find out the status of a person. Clothing is one of the most important status symbols.
Functions of clothing as a status symbol:
Compliance with the norms of etiquette (a strict suit of a top manager);
demonstration of belonging to a particular status (police uniform).
Social mobility is the movement of individuals or social groups from one position in the hierarchy of social stratification to another, a change in status.
Mobility types:
1) voluntary and forced;
2) intergenerational (moving children to a higher or lower step compared to their parents) and intragenerational (one and the same individual changes his social position several times throughout his life);
3) individual (movements within society occur in one person independently of others) and group (movements occur collectively, the position of the entire group changes);
4) vertical and horizontal. Vertical mobility is a change in status with a change in position in the social hierarchy. Vertical mobility is divided into downward and upward mobility. Horizontal mobility is a change in status without a noticeable change in position in the social hierarchy.
Movement between strata is carried out through special channels ("elevators"), the most important of which are such social institutions as the army, family, school, church, property.
Theory of social stratification
Most modern sociologists adhere to the theory of social stratification, which is based on the division of society into layers - strata. The concept of "stratum" came into sociology from geology, where it is understood as layers, layers of heterogeneous formations in the geological structure of the Earth.In sociology, a strata means a sufficiently large number of people united by certain social connections(economic, political, cultural, social, demographic, etc.).
All people belonging to a particular stratum occupy approximately the same social position (status), which is characterized by a certain level of wealth, prestige, rights and privileges.
Such sociologists as M. Weber, R. Dahrendorf, T. Parsons, P. Sorokin made a great contribution to the development of the theory of social stratification.
In contrast to the definition of class, in which the main criteria are relations to the means of production and the method of obtaining a share of social wealth, the criteria of stratum are in themselves neutral.
So, for example, P. Sorokin considers the following stratum criteria to be the main ones:
The nature of work (profession);
- qualification;
- education;
- role in production management;
- income.
The theory of stratification has the advantage that it allows dividing people into very different strata: for a more accurate analysis that requires the differentiation of society into thin layers, several dozen stratification criteria can be introduced (for example, not only money, but also the presence of a house, car, swimming pool, radiotelephone etc.); a rough analysis can be limited to several criteria.
The modern Russian sociologist A. Zinoviev believes that the stratification of Soviet society, the features of which are still largely carried by modern Russia, was carried out according to the following criteria:
Position on the ladder of social positions;
- prestige of the profession;
- the size of the salary;
- the presence (absence) of privileges;
- the nature of the privileges;
- the possibility of using one's official position;
- education;
- cultural level;
- living conditions;
- access to life's blessings;
- sphere of communication;
- prospects for improvement;
- prospects for the placement of children.
As you can see, this approach explains much more the position of a particular person, the forces driving him, the social structure of society than the theory of "two and a half classes." This in no way means that the conflict approach to the analysis of society, which is the basis of Marxism, is wrong. Sociologists have modernized class theory. M. Weber, R. Dahrendorf, L. Koser believe that class and group contradictions form the basis of social dynamics.
The theory of social stratification allows not only to determine the social structure of society and find the place of each individual in this structure (status), but also to compare, analyze different societies, draw conclusions about the levels and trends of their development.
The main difference between American society and Russian society is that not everything is determined by the position of the individual in relation to the authorities, the state. In the higher strata of society there are people of free professions - managers, entrepreneurs, lawyers, doctors, university professors. In Russian society, a state official almost always stands above a person of civil society. Obviously, with a successful outcome of the reforms, the stratification of Russian society in this respect will approach the American one.
A great contribution to the development of views on the social structure of society was made by sociologists V. Pareto, G. Mosca, R. Michels, who created the theory of elites.
The term "elite" means "the best", "selective", "chosen".
In sociology, the elite is understood as the highest privileged layer that manages society and develops its culture.
V. Pareto divides the whole society into an elite, psychologically predisposed to management, and not an elite - a controlled majority.
G. Mosca believes that the ruling class (elite) needs support in society, or a more numerous class that makes up the base, the foundation of the elite, that is, the middle class.
Thus, the theory of elites from the point of view of the stratification of society does not contradict the theory of the middle class, according to which the majority of modern post-industrial society is made up of people who identify and self-identify as the middle class, belong to strata occupying an intermediate position between the elite (upper class) and the lower strata of society. Sociological studies show that the elite of industrial societies is 1–3%, the middle strata 70–75%, and the lower strata 20–25%.
In the 20s. 20th century American sociologist R. Park introduced the concept of marginals (from Latin margo - edge), i.e. people who do not recognize the values and norms of their stratum, society and, thus, "fall to the sidelines", becoming outcasts. A marginal is not necessarily a beggar, a homeless person. This is a fighter for their values and norms. The marginal may be a professor who fights against the dominant scientific school; a dissident (dissenter), a nonconformist who does not recognize the prevailing social values and norms, a vagabond, etc. Marginals make up an insignificant part of society.
The social structure of the post-industrial society is a rhombus or a truncated rhombus, in contrast to the triangle, the pyramid of the social structure of an industrial society. Changes in the social structure occur due to a sharp increase in the middle class and its greater differentiation and a significant decrease in the number of the lower strata in the process of reducing manual labor.
Sorokin's social stratification
Social stratification is the differentiation of a certain set of people into classes in a hierarchical rank. It finds expression in the existence of higher and lower strata. Its basis and essence lies in the uneven distribution of rights and privileges, responsibilities and obligations, the presence or absence of social values, power and influence among members of a particular community. Specific forms of social stratification are very diverse.If the economic status of members of a certain society is not the same, if there are both haves and have-nots among them, then such a society is characterized by the presence of economic stratification, regardless of whether it is organized on communist or capitalist principles, whether it is constitutionally defined as a "society of equals" or not .
No labels, signs, oral statements are able to change or obscure the reality of the fact of economic inequality, which is expressed in the difference in incomes, living standards, in the existence of rich and poor sections of the population. If within a group there are hierarchically different ranks in terms of authority and prestige and honors, if there are rulers and ruled, then regardless of the terms (monarchs, bureaucrats, masters, bosses) this means that such a group is politically differentiated, whatever it neither proclaimed in its constitution or declaration.
If the members of a society are divided into different groups according to the nature of their activity, occupation, and some professions are considered more prestigious in comparison with others, and if the members of a particular professional group are divided into leaders of various ranks and subordinates, then such a group professionally differentiated, regardless of whether superiors are elected or appointed, whether they inherit their leadership positions or because of their personal qualities.
The specific aspects of social stratification are numerous. However, all their diversity can be reduced to three main forms: economic, political and professional stratification. As a rule, they are all closely intertwined. People who belong to the highest stratum in one respect usually belong to the same stratum in other respects; and vice versa.
Representatives of the highest economic strata simultaneously belong to the highest political and professional strata. The poor, as a rule, are disenfranchised and are in the lower strata of the professional hierarchy. Takovo general rule although there are many exceptions.
So, for example, the richest are not always at the top of the political or professional pyramid, nor in all cases are the poor at the lowest places in the political and professional hierarchy. And this means that the interdependence of the three forms of social stratification is far from perfect, because the various layers of each of the forms do not completely coincide with each other. Rather, they coincide with each other, but only partially, that is, to a certain extent. This fact does not allow us to analyze all three main forms of social stratification together. For greater pedantry, it is necessary to analyze each of the forms separately. The real picture of the social stratification of any society is very complex and confusing.
To facilitate the analysis process, only the main, most important properties should be taken into account, in order to simplify, omitting details that do not distort the overall picture.
Types of social stratification
Social stratification is a certain orderliness of society. At the stages of human existence, its three main types can be traced: caste, estate and class. The primitive state is characterized by a natural structuring by age and gender.The first type of social stratification is the division of society into castes. The caste system is a closed type of society, i.e. status is given from birth, and mobility is almost impossible. The caste was a hereditary association of people connected by traditional occupations and limited in communication with each other. Caste system took place in Ancient Egypt, Peru, Iran, Japan, in the southern states of the USA. Its classic example was India, where the caste organization turned into a comprehensive social system.
The hierarchical ladder of access to wealth and prestige in India had the following steps:
1) brahmins - priests;
2) kshatriyas - military aristocracy;
3) vaishyas - farmers, artisans, merchants, free community members;
4) Shudras - not free community members, servants, slaves;
5) "untouchables", whose contacts with other castes were excluded. This system was banned in India in the 50s of the twentieth century, but caste prejudice and inequality still make themselves felt today.
The second type of social stratification - class - also characterizes a closed society, where mobility is strictly limited, although it is allowed. The estate, like the caste, was associated with the inheritance of rights and obligations enshrined in custom and law. But unlike caste, the principle of inheritance in estates is not so absolute, and membership can be bought, bestowed, recruited. Class stratification is characteristic of European feudalism, but was also present in other traditional civilizations.
Its model is medieval France, where society was divided into four estates:
1) the clergy;
2) nobility;
3) artisans, merchants, servants (city dwellers);
4) peasants. In Russia, from Ivan the Terrible (the middle of the 17th century) to Catherine II, a hierarchy of estates was formed, officially approved by her decrees (1762 - 1785) in the following form: the nobility, the clergy, the merchants, the bourgeoisie, the peasantry. The decrees stipulated the paramilitary class (sub-ethnos), the Cossacks and the raznochintsy.
Class stratification is characteristic of open societies. It differs significantly from caste and class stratification.
These differences appear as follows:
Classes are not created on the basis of legal and religious norms, membership in them is not based on hereditary position;
- class systems are more mobile, and the boundaries between classes are not rigidly delineated;
- classes depend on economic differences between groups of people associated with inequality in ownership and control over material resources;
- class systems carry out mainly connections of an impersonal nature. The main basis of class differences - the inequality between conditions and wages - applies to all professional groups as a result of economic circumstances belonging to the economy as a whole;
- social mobility is much simpler than in other stratification systems, there are no formal restrictions for it, although mobility is really constrained by a person's starting capabilities and the level of his claims.
Classes can be defined as large groups of people that differ in their general economic opportunities, which significantly affect their types of lifestyle.
The most influential theoretical approaches in the definition of classes and class stratification belong to K. Marx and M. Weber.
According to Marx, a class is a community of people in direct relation to the means of production. He singled out the exploiting and exploited classes in society at different stages. The stratification of society according to Marx is one-dimensional, connected only with classes, since its main basis is the economic situation, and all the rest (rights, privileges, power, influence) fit into the “Procrustean bed” of the economic situation, are combined with it.
M. Weber defined classes as groups of people who have a similar position in a market economy, receive similar economic rewards and have similar life chances. Class divisions stem not only from control of the means of production, but also from economic differences not related to property. Such sources include professional excellence, a rare specialty, high qualifications, ownership of intellectual property, etc. Weber gave not only class stratification, considering it only a part of the structuring necessary for a complex capitalist society. He proposed a three-dimensional division: if economic differences (by wealth) give rise to class stratification, then spiritual (by prestige) - status, and political (by access to power) - party. In the first case, we are talking about the life chances of social strata, in the second - about the image and style of their life, in the third - about the possession of power and influence on it. Most sociologists consider the Weberian scheme to be more flexible and appropriate for modern society.
Stratification of social groups
Different social groups occupy different positions in society. This position is determined by unequal rights and privileges, responsibilities and duties, property and income, attitudes towards power and influence among members of their community.Social differentiation (from lat. differentia - difference) is the division of society into various social groups that occupy different positions in it.
Inequality is the uneven distribution of the scarce resources of society - money, power, education and prestige - between different strata and strata of the population.
Social inequality is an internal characteristic of any social group and society as a whole, otherwise their existence as a system would be impossible. The factor of inequality determines the development and dynamics of a social group.
In the early stages of social development, such individual characteristics as gender, age, and kinship are socially significant. The objective inequality that really exists here is interpreted as the natural order of things, that is, as the absence of social inequality.
In a traditional society based on the division of labor, a class structure is emerging: peasants, artisans, nobility. However, in this society, objective inequality is recognized as a manifestation of the Divine order, and not as social inequality.
In modern society, objective inequality is already recognized as a manifestation of social inequality, that is, it is interpreted from the point of view of equality.
The difference between groups according to the principle of inequality is expressed in the formation of social strata.
Under the stratum (from the Latin stratum - layer, flooring) in sociology is understood a real, empirically fixed community, a social layer, a group of people united by some common social sign(property, professional, level of education, power, prestige, etc.). The reason for inequality is the heterogeneity of labor, which results in the appropriation of power and property by some people, the uneven distribution of rewards and incentives. The concentration of power, property and other resources in the elite contributes to the emergence of social conflicts.
Inequality can be represented as a scale, on one pole of which there will be those who own the largest (rich), and on the other - the smallest (poor) amount of goods. Money is a universal measure of inequality in modern society. To describe the inequality of different social groups, there is the concept of "social stratification".
Social stratification (from Latin stratum - layer, flooring and facege - to do) is a system that includes many social formations, whose representatives differ from each other in an unequal amount of power and material wealth, rights and obligations, privileges and prestige.
The term "stratification" came to sociology from geology, where it refers to the vertical arrangement of the Earth's layers.
According to the theory of stratification, modern society is layered, multi-level, outwardly resembling geological layers. The following stratification criteria are distinguished: income; power; education; prestige.
Stratification has two essential characteristics that distinguish it from a simple bundle:
1. The upper strata are in a more privileged position (with respect to the possession of resources or opportunities to receive rewards) in relation to the lower strata.
2. The upper layers are much smaller than the lower ones in terms of the number of members of society included in them.
Social stratification in various theoretical systems is understood differently. There are three classical strands of stratification theories:
1. Marxism - the main type of stratification - class (from Latin classis - group, category) stratification, which is based on economic factors, primarily property relations. A person's attitude to property determines his position in society and his place on the stratification scale.
2. Functionalism - social stratification associated with the professional division of labor. Unequal remuneration is a necessary mechanism by which society ensures that the most important places in society are filled by the most qualified people. This concept was introduced into scientific circulation by the Russian-American sociologist and culturologist P. A. Sorokin (1889-1968).
3. The theory based on the views of M. Weber - the basis of any stratification is the distribution of power and authority, which are not directly determined by property relations. The most important relatively independent hierarchical structures are economic, sociocultural, and political. Accordingly, the social groups that stand out in these structures are class, status, party.
Types of stratification systems:
1) Physical-genetic - based on the ranking of people according to natural characteristics: gender, age, the presence of certain physical qualities - strength, dexterity, beauty, etc.
2) Etatocratic (from French etat - state) - differentiation between groups is carried out according to their position in the power-state hierarchies (political, military, administrative and economic), according to the possibilities of mobilizing and distributing resources, as well as according to the privileges that these groups have depending on their rank in the power structures.
3) Socio-professional - groups are divided according to the content and working conditions; ranking here is carried out with the help of certificates (diplomas, grades, licenses, patents, etc.), fixing the level of qualification and ability to perform certain types of activities (rank grid in the public sector of industry, the system of certificates and diplomas of education received, the system of assignment scientific degrees and titles, etc.).
4) Cultural-symbolic - arises from differences in access to socially significant information, not equal opportunity to select, preserve and interpret it for pre-industrial societies, theocratic (from gr. theos - god and kratos - power) manipulation of information is characteristic, for industrial - partocratic (from lat. pars (partis) - part, group and gr. kratos - power), for post-industrial - technocratic (from Gr. techno - skill, craft and kratos - power).
5) Cultural and normative - differentiation is built on differences in respect and prestige that arise as a result of comparing existing norms and lifestyles inherent in certain social groups (attitude towards physical and mental labor, consumer standards, tastes, ways of communication, professional terminology, local dialect, etc.).
6) Socio-territorial - is formed due to the unequal distribution of resources between regions, differences in access to jobs, housing, quality goods and services, educational and cultural institutions, etc.
In reality, these stratification systems are closely intertwined and complement each other. For example, the socio-professional hierarchy in the form of an officially fixed division of labor not only performs important independent functions for maintaining the life of society, but also has a significant impact on the structure of any stratification system.
In modern sociology, the most common are two main approaches to the analysis of the social structure of society: stratification and class, which are based on the concepts of "stratum" and "class".
The stratum is distinguished by:
income level;
the main features of the lifestyle;
inclusion in power structures;
property relations;
social prestige;
self-assessment of one's position in society.
The class is distinguished by:
place in the system of social production;
relation to the means of production;
roles in public organization labor;
methods and amounts of wealth.
The main difference between the stratification and class approaches is that within the framework of the latter, economic factors are dominant, all other criteria are their derivatives.
The stratification approach proceeds from taking into account not only economic, but also political, actually social, as well as socio-psychological factors. This implies that there is not always a rigid connection between them: a high position in one position can be combined with a low position in another.
Stratification approach:
1) Accounting, first of all, for the value of one or another attribute (income, education, access to power).
2) The basis for the allocation of strata is a set of features, among which access to wealth plays an important role.
3) Taking into account not only the factor of conflict, but also solidarity, complementarity of various social strata.
Class approach in the Marxist sense:
1) Aligning groups on a scale of inequality, depending on the presence or absence of a leading feature.
2) The basis for the allocation of classes is the possession of private property, which makes it possible to appropriate profits.
3) The division of society into conflict groups.
Social stratification performs two functions - it is a method of identifying the social strata of a given society and gives an idea of the social portrait of a given society.
Social stratification is distinguished by a certain stability within a particular historical stage.
Classes of social stratification
Inequality is a characteristic feature of any society, when some individuals, groups or layers have more opportunities or resources (financial, power, etc.) than others.To describe the system of inequality in sociology, the concept of "social stratification" is used. The very word "stratification" is borrowed from geology, where "stratum" means a geological layer. This concept quite accurately conveys the content of social differentiation, when social groups line up in social space in a hierarchically organized, vertically sequential row according to some measuring criterion.
In Western sociology, there are several concepts of stratification. The West German sociologist R. Dahrendorf proposed to put the political concept of "authority" as the basis of social stratification, which, in his opinion, most accurately characterizes the relations of power and the struggle between social groups for power. Based on this approach, R. Dahrendorf imagined the structure of society, consisting of managers and managed. He, in turn, divided the former into managing owners and managing non-owners, or bureaucratic managers. The second he also divided into two subgroups: the highest, or labor aristocracy, and the lowest - low-skilled workers. Between these two main groups he placed the so-called "new middle class".
The American sociologist L. Warner singled out four parameters as defining features of stratification:
Income;
- prestige of the profession;
- education;
- ethnicity.
Thus, he defined six main classes:
The upper-upper class included rich people. But the main criterion for their selection was "noble origin";
- the lower upper class also included people of high income, but they did not come from aristocratic families. Many of them had only recently become rich, boasted of it, and sought to flaunt their luxurious clothes, jewelry, and fancy cars;
- the upper layer of the middle class consisted of highly educated people engaged in intellectual work, and business people, lawyers, owners of capital;
- the lower middle class was represented mainly by clerks and other "white collars" (secretaries, bank tellers, clerks);
- the upper layer of the lower class were "blue collars" - factory workers and other manual laborers;
- finally, the lower stratum of the lower class included the poorest and most outcast members of society.
Another American sociologist B. Barber stratified according to six indicators:
Prestige, profession, power and might;
- income level;
- the level of education;
- the degree of religiosity;
- position of relatives;
- ethnicity.
The French sociologist A. Touraine believed that all these criteria were already outdated, and proposed to define groups according to access to information. The dominant position, in his opinion, is occupied by those people who have access to the greatest amount of information.
P. Sorokin identified three criteria for stratification:
Income level (rich and poor);
- political status (those who have power and those who do not have it);
- professional roles (teachers, engineers, doctors, etc.).
T. Parsons supplemented these signs with new criteria:
Qualitative characteristics inherent in people from birth (nationality, gender, family ties);
- role characteristics (position, level of knowledge; vocational training etc.);
- "characteristics of possession" (the presence of property, material and spiritual values, privileges, etc.).
In modern post-industrial society, it is customary to distinguish four main stratification variables:
Income level;
- attitude to power;
- prestige of the profession;
- the level of education.
Income - the amount of money received by an individual or family for a certain period of time (month, year). Income is the amount of money received in the form of wages, pensions, allowances, alimony, fees, deductions from profits. Income is measured in rubles or dollars received by an individual (individual income) or a family (family income). Incomes are most often spent on maintaining life, but if they are very high, they accumulate and turn into wealth.
Wealth - accumulated income, that is, the amount of cash or embodied money. In the second case, they are called movable (car, yacht, securities, etc.) and immovable (house, works of art, treasures) property. Usually, wealth is inherited, which can be received by both working and non-working heirs, and only working ones can receive income. The main wealth of the upper class is not income, but accumulated property. The salary share is small. For the middle and lower classes, the main source of subsistence is income, since in the first case, if there is wealth, it is insignificant, and in the second it is not at all. Wealth allows you not to work, and its absence forces you to work for the sake of wages.
Wealth and income are unevenly distributed and signify economic inequality. Sociologists interpret it as an indicator that different groups of the population have unequal life chances. They buy different quantities and different qualities of food, clothing, housing, etc. But in addition to the obvious economic advantages, the wealthy have hidden privileges. The poor have shorter lives (even if they enjoy all the benefits of medicine), less educated children (even if they go to the same public schools), and so on.
Education is measured by the number of years of study at a public or private school or university.
Power is measured by the number of people who are affected by the decision. The essence of power is the ability to impose one's will against the will of others. In a complex society, power is institutionalized, that is, it is protected by laws and tradition, surrounded by privileges and wide access to social benefits, and allows making decisions that are vital for society, including laws that, as a rule, are beneficial to the upper class. In all societies, people who hold some form of power—political, economic, or religious—make up an institutionalized elite. It determines the domestic and foreign policy of the state, directing it in a direction that is beneficial to itself, which other classes are deprived of.
Three scales of stratification - income, education and power - have completely objective units of measurement: dollars, years, people. Prestige is outside this range, as it is a subjective indicator. Prestige is the respect that a particular profession, position, occupation enjoys in public opinion.
The generalization of these criteria makes it possible to represent the process of social stratification as a multifaceted stratification of people and groups in society on the grounds of owning (or not owning) property, power, certain levels of education and training, ethnic characteristics, gender and age characteristics, sociocultural criteria, political positions, social statuses. and roles.
There are nine types of historical stratification systems that can be used to describe any social organism, namely:
Physico-genetic,
- slaveholding,
- caste,
- class,
- etacratic
- social and professional,
- class,
- cultural and symbolic,
- cultural and normative.
All nine types of stratification systems are nothing more than "ideal types". Any real society is their complex mixture, combination. In reality, stratification types are intertwined and complement each other.
The basis of the first type - the physical-genetic stratification system - is the differentiation of social groups according to "natural", socio-demographic characteristics. Here, the attitude towards a person or group is determined by gender, age and the presence of certain physical qualities - strength, beauty, dexterity. Accordingly, the weaker, those with physical disabilities are considered defective and occupy a humbled social position. Inequality is affirmed in this case by the existence of the threat of physical violence or its actual use, and then fixed in customs and rituals. This "natural" stratification system dominated the primitive community, but continues to be reproduced to this day. It is especially strong in communities struggling for physical survival or expansion of their living space.
The second stratification system - slaveholding - is also based on direct violence. But inequality here is determined not by physical, but by military-legal coercion. Social groups differ in the presence or absence of civil rights and property rights. Certain social groups have been completely deprived of these rights and, moreover, along with things, have been turned into an object of private property. Moreover, this position is most often inherited and thus fixed in generations. Examples of slaveholding systems are quite diverse. This is ancient slavery, where the number of slaves sometimes exceeded the number of free citizens, and servility in Rus' during the Russkaya Pravda, and plantation slavery in the south of the North American United States before the civil war of 1861-1865, this is, finally, the work of prisoners of war and deported persons on German private farms during World War II.
The third type of stratification system is caste. It is based on ethnic differences, which, in turn, are reinforced by the religious order and religious rituals. Each caste is a closed, as far as possible, endogamous group, which is assigned a strictly defined place in the social hierarchy. This place appears as a result of the isolation of the functions of each caste in the system of division of labor. There is a clear list of occupations that members of a particular caste can engage in: priestly, military, agricultural. Since the position in the caste system is inherited, the possibilities of social mobility are extremely limited here. And the stronger caste is expressed, the more closed this society turns out to be. India is rightfully considered a classic example of a society with a dominance of the caste system (this system was legally abolished here only in 1950). In India, there were 4 main castes: Brahmins (priests), Kshatriyas (warriors), Vaishyas (merchants), Shudras (workers and peasants) and about 5 thousand minor castes and podcasts. The untouchables, who were not part of the castes and occupied the lowest social position, stood out in particular. Today, although in a smoother form, the caste system is reproduced not only in India, but, for example, in the clan system of the Central Asian states.
The fourth type is represented by a class stratification system. In this system, groups differ in legal rights, which, in turn, are strictly related to their duties and are directly dependent on these duties. Moreover, the latter imply obligations to the state, enshrined in law. Some classes are obliged to carry out military or bureaucratic service, others - "tax" in the form of taxes or labor duties. Examples of developed estate systems are feudal Western European societies or feudal Russia. So, class division is, first of all, a legal, and not an ethnic-religious or economic division. It is also important that belonging to a class is inherited, contributing to the relative closeness of this system.
Some similarity with the estate system is observed in the etacratic system representing the fifth type (from French and Greek - “ government"). In it, differentiation between groups occurs, first of all, according to their position in the power-state hierarchies (political, military, economic), according to the possibilities of mobilizing and distributing resources, as well as according to the privileges that these groups are able to derive from their positions of power. The degree of material well-being, the style of life of social groups, as well as the prestige they feel, are connected here with the formal ranks that these groups occupy in the respective power hierarchies. All other differences - demographic and religious-ethnic, economic and cultural - play a secondary role. The scale and nature of differentiation (volumes of power) in the etacratic system are under the control of the state bureaucracy. At the same time, hierarchies can be fixed formally legally - through bureaucratic tables of ranks, military regulations, assigning categories to state institutions - or they can remain outside the sphere of state legislation (a good example is the system of the Soviet party nomenklatura, the principles of which are not spelled out in any laws) . The formal freedom of members of society (with the exception of dependence on the state), the absence of automatic inheritance of positions of power also distinguish the etacratic system from the system of estates. The etacratic system is revealed with all the greater force, the more authoritarian character the government assumes.
In accordance with the socio-professional stratification system, groups are divided according to the content and conditions of their work. They play a special role qualification requirements required for a particular professional role - the possession of relevant experience, skills and abilities. Approval and maintenance of hierarchical orders in this system is carried out with the help of certificates (diplomas, grades, licenses, patents), fixing the level of qualification and ability to perform certain types of activities. The validity of qualification certificates is supported by the power of the state or some other sufficiently powerful corporation (professional workshop). Moreover, these certificates are most often not inherited, although there are exceptions in history. The socio-professional division is one of the basic stratification systems, various examples of which can be found in any society with any developed division of labor. This is a system of craft workshops in a medieval city and a rank grid in modern state industry, a system of certificates and diplomas of education received, a system of scientific degrees and titles that open the way to more prestigious jobs.
The seventh type is represented by the most popular class system. The class approach is often opposed to the stratification approach. But class division is only a particular case of social stratification. In the socio-economic interpretation, classes represent social groups of politically and politically free legal relation citizens. The differences between these groups lie in the nature and extent of ownership of the means of production and the product produced, as well as in the level of income received and personal material well-being. Unlike many previous types, belonging to classes - bourgeois, proletarians, independent farmers, etc. - is not regulated by the highest authorities, is not established by law and is not inherited (property and capital are transferred, but not the status itself). In its purest form, the class system does not contain any internal formal partitions at all (economic prosperity automatically transfers you to a higher group).
Another stratification system can be conditionally called cultural-symbolic. Differentiation arises here from differences in access to socially significant information, unequal opportunities to filter and interpret this information, and the ability to be a bearer of sacred knowledge (mystical or scientific). In ancient times, this role was assigned to priests, magicians and shamans, in the Middle Ages - to church ministers, interpreters of sacred texts, who make up the bulk of the literate population, in modern times - to scientists, technocrats and party ideologists. Claims for communion with divine forces, for the possession of truth, for the expression of the state interest have existed always and everywhere. And a higher position in this regard is occupied by those who have the best opportunities to manipulate the consciousness and actions of other members of society, who can prove their rights to true understanding better than others, who own the best symbolic capital.
Finally, the last, ninth type of stratification system should be called cultural-normative. Here, differentiation is built on differences in respect and prestige that arise from a comparison of the way of life and the norms of behavior followed by a given person or group. Attitudes towards physical and mental work, consumer tastes and habits, manners of communication and etiquette, a special language (professional terminology, local dialect, criminal jargon) - all this forms the basis of social division. Moreover, there is not only a distinction between “us” and “them”, but also a ranking of groups (“noble - ignoble”, “decent - dishonorable”, “elite - ordinary people - bottom”).
The concept of stratification (from Latin stratum - layer, layer) denotes the stratification of society, differences in the social status of its members. Social stratification is a system of social inequality, consisting of hierarchically arranged social strata (strata). All people belonging to a particular stratum occupy approximately the same position and have common status characteristics.
Different sociologists explain the causes of social inequality and, consequently, social stratification in different ways. Thus, according to the Marxist school of sociology, inequality is based on property relations, the nature, degree and form of ownership of the means of production. According to the functionalists (K. Davis, W. Moore), the distribution of individuals by social strata depends on the importance of their professional activities and the contribution that they make with their work to achieve the goals of society. Proponents of the exchange theory (J. Homans) believe that inequality in society arises due to the unequal exchange of the results of human activity.
A number of classic sociologists considered the problem of stratification more broadly. For example, M. Weber, in addition to economic (attitude to property and income level), proposed in addition such criteria as social prestige (inherited and acquired status) and belonging to certain political circles, hence power, authority and influence.
One of the creators of the theory of stratification, P. Sorokin, identified three types of stratification structures:
Economic (according to the criteria of income and wealth);
- political (according to the criteria of influence and power);
- professional (according to the criteria of mastery, professional skills, successful performance of social roles).
The founder of structural functionalism T. Parsons proposed three groups of differentiating features:
Qualitative characteristics of people that they possess from birth (ethnicity, family ties, gender and age characteristics, personal qualities and abilities);
- role characteristics determined by a set of roles performed by an individual in society (education, position, various types of professional and labor activity);
- characteristics due to the possession of material and spiritual values (wealth, property, privileges, the ability to influence and manage other people, etc.).
In modern sociology, it is customary to distinguish the following main criteria for social stratification:
Income - the amount of cash receipts for a certain period (month, year);
- wealth - accumulated income, i.е. the amount of cash or embodied money (in the second case, they act in the form of movable or immovable property);
- power - the ability and ability to exercise one's will, to exert a decisive influence on the activities of other people through various means (authority, law, violence, etc.). Power is measured by the number of people it extends to;
- education - a set of knowledge, skills and abilities acquired in the learning process. The level of education is measured by the number of years of education;
- prestige - a public assessment of the attractiveness, significance of a particular profession, position, a certain type of occupation.
Despite the diversity various models social stratification currently existing in sociology, most scholars distinguish three main classes: higher, middle and lower. At the same time, the share of the upper class in industrialized societies is approximately 5-7%; middle - 60-80% and lower - 13-35%.
In a number of cases, sociologists make a certain division within each class.
Thus, the American sociologist W.L. Warner (1898-1970), in his famous study of Yankee City, identified six classes:
Upper-upper class (representatives of influential and wealthy dynasties with significant resources of power, wealth and prestige);
- lower-upper class ("new rich" - bankers, politicians who do not have a noble origin and did not have time to create powerful role-playing clans);
- upper-middle class (successful businessmen, lawyers, entrepreneurs, scientists, managers, doctors, engineers, journalists, cultural and art figures);
- lower-middle class (employees - engineers, clerks, secretaries, employees and other categories, which are commonly called "white collars");
- upper-lower class (workers engaged mainly in physical labor);
- lower-lower class (beggars, unemployed, homeless, foreign workers, declassed elements).
There are other schemes of social stratification. But they all boil down to the following: non-basic classes arise by adding strata and layers that are inside one of the main classes - rich, wealthy and poor.
Thus, social stratification is based on natural and social inequality between people, which manifests itself in their social life and has a hierarchical character. It is sustainably supported and regulated by various social institutions, constantly reproduced and modified, which is an important condition for the functioning and development of any society.
Types of social stratification
Modern theories of social stratification consider society as a hierarchical structure, at the top of which are privileged strata (strata of the population), and at the bottom are strata with a less advantageous position. Society has always been socially heterogeneous. People differ in physical strength, health, knowledge and skills, as well as social status and income.The stratification of society is more often linked with such concepts as "slavery", "caste", "estates", "classes".
Accordingly, the types of social stratification are distinguished:
Slave-owning stratification was based on the direct physical violence of slave owners in relation to slaves dependent on them. Slavery is the most obvious form of social inequality, when one individual is the property of another. As a result of the growing resistance of the slaves, and also because of their low interest in the results of their labor, this form of social stratification collapsed.
Caste stratification is associated with religious traditions, which fix the differentiation of the population into groups according to the types of permitted and prohibited activities. Caste is a rather vague concept. Most often it is associated with Indian culture, although the division of society into castes existed in other regions of the world. (For example, warriors, priests, commoners in Ancient Egypt). The racial differences that exist in many countries also have, in essence, a pronounced caste character.
Class stratification is determined by the legally fixed division of society into large social groups in accordance with the lifelong duties assigned to them. Estates were represented by privileged and oppressed groups of people. Aristocrats, nobles in Europe were the highest class. The clergy stood one step below. The third estate included merchants, artists, painters, free peasants (farmers), servants of noble persons. At the lowest social level were serfs.
Class stratification presupposes the economic inequality of citizens against the background of the proclaimed legal equality. Classes were present in all types of society, with the exception of primitive society, which was classless. The division of society into classes is usually based on the amount of income, the relationship to the means of production, or the level of control over production.
In modern society, along with class differentiation, there are other forms of social stratification:
Socio-demographic stratification - differentiation of the population by sex, age, the presence of certain physical qualities: strength, dexterity, beauty;
- socio-professional stratification - associated with the division of labor that has developed in society, requiring certain professional skills and experience;
- socio-cultural stratification - determined by unequal access to cultural values and therefore by the peculiarities of the way of life and style of behavior;
- socio-ethnic stratification - due to the ethnic characteristics of social groups.
Taken together, all types and forms of social stratification create a structurally complex, contradictory and unique structure of each specific society at each historical stage. The most acute contradictions are revealed in the formation of the social class composition of society.
Social structure and stratification
Between people in society there are differences of a social, biological, psychological nature. Social differences are called differences that are generated by social factors, such as: division of labor, lifestyle, functions performed, level of prosperity, etc. Modern society is characterized by the multiplication (growth) of social differences. Society is not only extremely differentiated and consists of many social groups, classes, communities, but also hierarchized: some layers have more power, more wealth, have a number of obvious advantages and privileges compared to others. Therefore, we can say that society has a social structure.The social structure is a stable set of elements, as well as connections and relationships that groups and communities of people enter into regarding the conditions of their life.
The initial element of the social structure of society is a person. Larger elements of the social structure: social groups, social strata (strata), classes, social communities, etc.
The social structure thus reflects the “vertical section” of society, however, all the constituent elements in society are located in a certain hierarchy, it is reflected by social stratification (“horizontal section”).
Social stratification (lat. stratum - layer, fasio - I do) - a set of vertically arranged social strata of society. The concept of stratification is borrowed by sociology from geology, where it denotes the position of layers of various rocks along the vertical.
A social stratum is a set of people within a large group who have a certain kind and level of prestige derived from their position, as well as the ability to achieve a special kind of monopoly. Sometimes in the literature, the concept of “social stratification” (i.e., division into layers) is used, which is identical to stratification. The term "stratification" captures not only the process of polarization of the population into poor and rich, but also the end result of stratification, when a middle class arises. The phenomenon of stratification is characteristic of both modern and pre-industrial societies.
A historical example of stratification is the caste system of Hindu society. In India, there were thousands of castes, but they were all grouped into four main ones: Brahmins - a caste of priests (3% of the population), Kshatriyas - descendants of warriors; vaishya - merchants, who together made up about 7% of Indians; sudra - peasants and artisans (70%); the rest are untouchables who have traditionally been cleaners, scavengers, tanners, swineherds. Strict rules did not allow representatives of the higher and lower castes to communicate, as it was believed that this defiles the higher ones. Of course, the stratification of ancient societies is not similar to the stratification of modern society, they differ in many criteria, one of which is the criterion of openness. In an open system of stratification, members of the social structure can easily change their social status (characteristic of modern societies); in a closed system of stratification, members of society can change their status with great difficulty (agrarian-type societies).
The theory of social structure and stratification in sociology was developed by M. Weber, P. Sorokin, K. Marx and others.
P. Sorokin identified 3 types of social stratification according to 3 criteria:
1) income level,
2) political status,
3) professional roles.
P. Sorokin represented social stratification as the division of society into strata (layers). He believed that the layers (strata) do not remain data, unchanged, they are in constant change and development. P. Sorokin called the totality of such changes social mobility, i.e. mobility of social strata and classes.
A social stratum is a set of people within a large group who have a certain kind and level of prestige gained through position, as well as the ability to achieve a monopoly.
Social mobility is a change by an individual or group of a place in the social structure of society, a movement from one social position to another.
Social mobility has various characteristics, of which the spatial characteristics, the speed and density of the flow of stratification changes are essential.
Movement (mobility) happens:
– horizontal, vertical (up and down to another layer or within its own stratum);
- slow, fast (in terms of speed);
- individual, group.
T. Parsons improved the theory of social stratification proposed by P. Sorokin.
He supplemented the stratification criteria with new features:
1) qualitative characteristics that people have from birth (ethnicity, gender characteristics);
2) role characteristics (position, level of knowledge);
3) characteristics of possession (property, material values).
K. Marx understood social structure as the division of society into social classes. He linked the division of society into classes with the division of labor and the institution of private property. He believed that the cause of social stratification is the division of society into those who own the means of production, and those who can only sell their labor. According to K. Marx, these two groups and their diverging interests serve as the basis for stratification. Thus, for Marx, social stratification existed in only one dimension - economic.
M. Weber believed that K. Marx simplified the picture of stratification too much; there are other criteria for division in society. He proposed a multidimensional approach to stratification. M. Weber considered the sources of the development of strata: various types of people's occupations (professions), "charisma" inherited by some people and the appropriation of political power.
The scientist proposed to use 3 criteria for the stratification of society:
– class (economic status);
– status (prestige);
- party (power).
The economic position of stratification is determined by the wealth and income of the individual; prestige is authority, influence, respect, the degree of which corresponds to a certain social status; power is the ability individuals and social groups to impose their will on others and mobilize human resources to achieve the goal.
These three dimensions are interrelated, but not necessarily high on one criterion, an individual will also be high on the other (for example, the prestige of a priest in society is high, but this group of the population ranks low in terms of influence on politics).
Social stratification system
Distinguish between open and closed systems of stratification.A social structure whose members can change their status relatively easily is called an open system of stratification. In open systems of stratification, each member of society can change his status, rise or fall on the social ladder based on his own efforts and abilities. Modern societies, experiencing the need for qualified and competent specialists capable of managing complex social, political and economic processes, provide a fairly free movement of individuals in the system of stratification.
An open society is also called a society of equal opportunities, where everyone has a chance to rise to the highest levels of the social hierarchy.
A structure whose members can change their status with great difficulty is called a closed stratification system. An example of a closed system of stratification is the caste organization of India. A closed society is characterized by a rigid social structure that prevents people from moving not only up the social ladder, but also down. In such a society, social movements from the lower to the higher strata are either completely prohibited or significantly limited. Everyone knows their place in society, and this knowledge is passed down from generation to generation. Social statuses become heritable. Thanks to this centuries-old habituation to one's social position, not only a special psychology of fatalism, resignation to one's fate, but also a special kind of solidarity with the class and estate is formed. Corporate spirit, class ethics, code of honor - these concepts came from a closed society.
In sociology, four main types of stratification are known - slavery, castes, estates and classes. The first three characterize closed societies, the last type - open ones.
Slavery Slavery is historically the first system of social stratification. Slavery arose in ancient times in Egypt, Babylon, China, Greece, Rome and has survived in a number of regions almost to the present day. It has existed in the United States since the 19th century. Slavery was the least common among nomadic peoples, especially hunter-gatherers, and most prevalent in agrarian societies.
Slavery is an economic, social and legal form enslavement of people, bordering on complete lack of rights and an extreme degree of inequality.
Slavery has historically evolved. The primitive form, or patriarchal slavery, and the developed form, or classical slavery, differ substantially. In the first case, the slave had all the rights of the youngest member of the family: he lived in the same house with the owners, participated in public life, married the free, inherited the property of the owner. It was forbidden to kill him. An example is serfdom in Rus' in the 10th-12th centuries. At the mature stage (during classical slavery), the slave was finally enslaved: he lived in a separate room, did not participate in anything, did not inherit anything, did not marry and had no family. He was allowed to be killed. He did not own property, but he himself was considered the property of the owner ("talking tool"). This form includes ancient slavery in Ancient Greece and plantation slavery in the United States.
The following causes of slavery are usually cited:
First, a debt obligation, when a person who was unable to pay his debts fell into slavery to his creditor.
Secondly, the violation of laws, when the execution of a murderer or a robber was replaced by slavery, i.e. the culprit was handed over to the affected family as compensation for the grief or damage caused.
Thirdly, war, raids, conquest, when one group of people conquered another, and the winners used some of the captives as slaves. Historian Gerda Lerner notes that there were more women among the slaves captured in the war effort; they were used as concubines, in order to reproduce offspring and as an additional work force.
Thus, slavery was the result of a military defeat, a crime, or an unpaid debt, and not a sign of some inherent natural quality of some people.
Although slaveholding practices varied from region to region and from era to era, whether slavery was the result of unpaid debt, punishment, military captivity, or racial prejudice; whether it was permanent or temporary; hereditary or not, the slave was still the property of another person, and the system of laws secured the status of a slave. Slavery served as the main distinction between people, clearly indicating which person is free (and legally receives certain privileges) and which is a slave (without privileges).
Castes, like slavery, the caste system characterizes a closed society and rigid stratification. It is not as old as the slave system, and less common. If almost all countries went through slavery, of course, to varying degrees, then castes were found only in India and partly in Africa. India is a classic example of a caste society. It arose on the ruins of the slave system in the first centuries of the new era. A caste is a social group (stratum) in which a person owes membership solely to birth. He cannot move from one caste to another during his lifetime. To do this, he needs to be born again. The caste position of a person is fixed by the Hindu religion (now it is clear why castes are not widespread). According to its canons, people live more than one life. The previous life of a person determines the nature of his new birth and the caste into which he falls in this case - the lowest or vice versa.
Since in the caste system status is determined by birth and is lifelong, the basis of the caste system is prescribed status. The achieved status is not able to change the place of the individual in this system. People who are born into a low-status group will always have this status, no matter what they personally manage to achieve in life.
Societies that are characterized by this form of stratification strive for a clear preservation of the boundaries between castes, therefore endogamy is practiced here - marriages within one's own group - and there is a ban on intergroup marriages. To prevent inter-caste contact, such societies develop complex rules regarding ritual purity, according to which it is considered that communication with members of the lower castes defiles the higher caste.
Estates The form of stratification that precedes classes is estates. In the feudal societies that existed in Europe from the 4th to the 14th centuries, people were divided into estates. An estate is a social group that has fixed custom or legal law and inherited rights and obligations.
The estate system, which includes several strata, is characterized by a hierarchy, expressed in the inequality of their position and privileges. A classic example of class organization was feudal Europe, where at the turn of the 14th-15th centuries society was divided into upper classes (nobility and clergy) and an unprivileged third estate (artisans, merchants, peasants). And in the X-XIII centuries there were three main estates: the clergy, the nobility and the peasantry. In Russia, from the second half of the 18th century, a class division into nobility, clergy, merchants, peasantry and philistinism (middle urban strata) was established.
Estates were based on landed property. The rights and obligations of each estate were enshrined in legal law and consecrated by religious doctrine. Membership in the estate was determined by inheritance. Social barriers between the estates were quite rigid, so social mobility existed not so much between as within the estates. Each estate included many layers, ranks, levels, professions, ranks. So, only nobles could engage in public service. The aristocracy was considered a military estate (chivalry).
The higher in the social hierarchy an estate stood, the higher was its status. In contrast to castes, inter-class marriages were quite allowed, and individual mobility was also allowed. A simple person could become a knight by purchasing a special permit from the ruler. Merchants acquired titles of nobility for money. As a relic, this practice has partially survived in modern England.
Feature estates - the presence of social symbols and signs: titles, uniforms, orders, titles. Classes and castes did not have state distinctive signs, although they were distinguished by clothing, jewelry, norms and rules of conduct, and a ritual of conversion. In a feudal society, the upper class - the nobility - had their own symbols and signs given to them by the state.
Titles are statutory verbal designations of the official and estate-generic position of their holders, which briefly determined the legal status. In Russia in the 19th century, there were such titles as "general", "state councilor", "chamberlain", "count", "adjutant wing", "secretary of state", "excellency" and "lordship". The core of the title system was the rank - the rank of each civil servant (military, civilian or courtier). Before Peter I, the concept of "rank" meant any position, honorary title, social status of a person. In 1722, Peter I established a new system of ranks, known as the "Table of Ranks". Each type of public service - military, civilian and court - was divided into 14 ranks. The class denoted the rank of the position, which was called the class rank. The name "official" was assigned to its owner.
To public service only the nobility was allowed - local and service. Both were hereditary: the title of nobility was passed on to the wife, children and distant descendants through the male line. Noble status was usually formalized in the form of genealogy, family coat of arms, portraits of ancestors, legends, titles and orders. Thus, a sense of the continuity of generations, pride in one's family and a desire to preserve its good name gradually formed in the minds. Together, they constituted the concept of "noble honor", an important component of which was the respect and trust of others in a spotless name. The noble origin of a hereditary nobleman was determined by the merits of his family before the Fatherland.
Classes of the Stratification System based on slavery, castes and estates are closed. The boundaries separating people are so clear and rigid that they leave no room for people to move from one group to another, with the exception of marriages between members of different clans. The class system is much more open because it is based primarily on money or material possessions.
Class is also determined at birth - an individual receives the status of his parents, but the social class of an individual during his life can change depending on what he managed (or failed) to achieve in life.
Belonging to a social stratum in slave-owning, caste and estate-feudal societies was officially fixed - by legal or religious norms. In a class society, the situation is different: no legal documents regulate the place of the individual in the social structure. Every person is free to move, with ability, education or income, from one class to another.
Thus, there are no laws that determine the occupation or profession of an individual depending on birth or prohibit marriage with members of other social classes.
In sociology, the class is understood in two aspects - broad and narrow.
In a broad sense, a class is understood as a large social group of people who own or do not own the means of production, occupying a certain place in the system of social division of labor and characterized by a specific way of earning income.
Because the private property arises during the period of the birth of the state, it is believed that already in the Ancient East and in ancient Greece there were two opposite classes - slaves and slave owners. Feudalism and capitalism are no exception - and here there were and still are antagonistic classes: the exploiters and the exploited. This is the point of view of K. Marx, which is adhered to today not only by domestic, but also by many foreign sociologists.
In a narrow sense, a class is any social stratum in modern society that differs from others in income, education, power and prestige. This point of view prevails in foreign sociology, and now acquires the rights of citizenship also in the domestic one.
So, we can draw a very important conclusion: in the historical sense, classes are the youngest and most open type of stratification.
Indeed, belonging to a social stratum in slave-owning, caste and estate-feudal societies was fixed by legal or religious norms. In pre-revolutionary Russia, every person knew what class he was in. People, as they say, were assigned to one or another social stratum. In a class society, things are different. No one is assigned anywhere. The state does not deal with the issues of social consolidation of its citizens. The only controller is the public opinion of people, which is guided by customs, established practices, income, lifestyle and standards of behavior. Therefore, it is very difficult to accurately and unambiguously determine the number of classes in a particular country, the number of strata or layers into which they are divided, and the belonging of people to strata is very difficult.
From top to bottom in society are the strata of the rich, wealthy (middle class) and poor people. Large social strata are also called classes, within which we can find smaller divisions, which are actually called layers, or strata.
The rich occupy the most privileged positions and have the most prestigious professions. As a rule, they are better paid and are associated with mental work, the performance of managerial functions. Leaders, kings, kings, presidents, political leaders, big businessmen, scientists and artists are the elite of society.
The wealthy strata (middle class) in modern society include doctors, lawyers, teachers, qualified employees, the middle and petty bourgeoisie.
To the lower strata - unskilled workers, the unemployed, the poor. The working class, according to modern ideas, constitutes an independent group, which occupies an intermediate position between the middle and lower classes.
The wealthy of the upper class have a higher level of education and a greater amount of power. The lower class poor have little power, income or education. Thus, the prestige of the profession (occupation), the amount of power and the level of education are added to income as the main criterion for stratification.
In general, the main characteristic of the class system of social stratification is the relative flexibility of its boundaries. The class system leaves room for social mobility, i.e. to move up or down the social ladder. Having the potential to advance one's social position, or class, is one of the main driving forces that motivate people to study well and work hard. Of course, marital status, inherited by a person from birth, can also determine extremely unfavorable conditions that will not leave him a chance to rise too high in life, and provide the child with such privileges that it will be practically impossible for him to “slide down” the class ladder.
In addition to the presented stratification systems, there are also physical-genetic, etacratic, socio-professional; cultural-symbolic and cultural-normative.
The basis of the physical-genetic stratification system is the differentiation of social groups according to "natural", socio-demographic characteristics. Here, the attitude towards a person or group is determined by gender, age and the presence of certain physical qualities - strength, beauty, dexterity. Accordingly, the weaker, those with physical disabilities are considered defective and occupy a humbled social position. Inequality is affirmed in this case by the existence of the threat of physical violence or its actual use, and then fixed in customs and rituals. This "natural" stratification system dominated the primitive community, but continues to be reproduced to this day. It is especially strong in communities struggling for physical survival or expansion of their living space. The greatest prestige here belongs to those who are able to carry out violence against nature and people or resist such violence: a healthy young male breadwinner in a peasant community living on the fruits of primitive manual labor; courageous warrior of the Spartan state; a true Aryan of the National Socialist army, capable of producing healthy offspring.
The system that ranks people according to their capacity for physical violence is largely a product of the militarism of ancient and modern societies. At present, although devoid of its former significance, it is still supported by military, sports and sexual-erotic propaganda.
The etacratic system (from French and Greek - "state power") has some similarities with the estate system. In it, differentiation between groups occurs, first of all, according to their position in the power-state hierarchies (political, military, economic), according to the possibilities of mobilizing and distributing resources, as well as according to the privileges that these groups are able to derive from their positions of power. The degree of material well-being, the style of life of social groups, as well as the prestige they feel are connected here with the formal ranks that these groups occupy in the respective power hierarchies. All other differences - demographic and religious-ethnic, economic and cultural - play a secondary role.
The scale and nature of differentiation (volumes of power) in the etacratic system are under the control of the state bureaucracy. At the same time, hierarchies can be fixed formally legally - through bureaucratic tables of ranks, military regulations, assignment of categories to state institutions - or they can remain outside the sphere of state legislation (a good example is the system of the Soviet party nomenclature, the principles of which are not spelled out in any laws) . The formal freedom of members of society (with the exception of dependence on the state), the absence of automatic inheritance of positions of power also distinguish the etacratic system from the system of estates.
The etacratic system is revealed with all the greater force, the more authoritarian character the government assumes. In ancient times, striking examples of the etacratic system were observed in the societies of Asian despotism (China, India, Cambodia), located, however, by no means only in Asia (but, for example, in Peru, Egypt). In the twentieth century, it is actively asserting itself in the so-called "socialist societies" and, perhaps, even plays a decisive role in them.
In the socio-professional stratification system, groups are divided according to the content and conditions of their work. A special role is played by the qualification requirements for a particular professional role - the possession of relevant experience, skills and abilities. Approval and maintenance of hierarchical orders in this system is carried out with the help of certificates (diplomas, grades, licenses, patents), fixing the level of qualification and ability to perform certain types of activities. The validity of qualification certificates is supported by the power of the state or some other sufficiently powerful corporation (professional workshop). Moreover, these certificates are most often not inherited, although there are exceptions in history.
The socio-professional division is one of the basic stratification systems, various examples of which can be found in any society with any developed division of labor. This is a system of craft workshops in a medieval city and a rank grid in modern state industry, a system of certificates and diplomas of education received, a system of scientific degrees and titles that open the way to more prestigious jobs.
In the cultural-symbolic stratification system, differentiation arises from differences in access to socially significant information, unequal opportunities to filter and interpret this information, and the ability to be a bearer of sacred knowledge (mystical or scientific). In ancient times, this role was assigned to priests, magicians and shamans, in the Middle Ages - to the servants of the Church, interpreters of sacred texts, who make up the bulk of the literate population, in modern times - to scientists, technocrats and party ideologists. Claims for communion with divine forces, for the possession of scientific truth, for the expression of the state interest have existed always and everywhere. And a higher position in this regard is occupied by those who have the best opportunities to manipulate the consciousness and actions of other members of society, who can prove their rights to true understanding better than others, who own the best symbolic capital.
Pre-industrial societies are more characterized by theocratic manipulation; for industrial - partocratic; and for post-industrial - technocratic manipulation.
The cultural-normative type of the stratification system is characterized by differentiation built on differences in respect and prestige arising from a comparison of lifestyles and norms of behavior followed by a given person or group. Attitudes towards physical and mental labor, consumer tastes and habits, manners of communication and etiquette, a special language (professional terminology, local dialect, criminal jargon) - all this forms the basis of social division. Moreover, there is not only a distinction between "us" and "them", but also the ranking of groups ("noble - not noble", "decent - not decent", "elite - ordinary people - the bottom").
Social stratification of modern society
The Stalin-Brezhnev model of stratification was reduced only to forms of ownership and, on this basis, to two classes (workers and collective farm peasantry) and a stratum (intelligentsia). The existing social inequality, the alienation of classes from property and power in Soviet science were not subjected to open structuring until the mid-1980s. However, foreign researchers were engaged in the stratification of social inequality in Soviet society. One of them - A. Inkels - analyzed the 1940s-1950s. and gave a conical model of the hierarchical division of society in the USSR.Using the material level, privileges and power as bases, he outlined nine social strata: the ruling elite, the upper intelligentsia, the labor aristocracy, the mainstream intelligentsia, the middle workers, the wealthy peasants, the white collar workers, the middle peasants, the underprivileged workers, and the forced labor group ( prisoners). The inertia of a society closed to study turned out to be so great that at the present time the domestic stratification analysis is just unfolding.
Researchers turn to both the Soviet past and the current Russian society. Variations of three layers are known (business layer, middle layer, lumpen layer) and a model of eleven hierarchical levels (apparatus, "comprador", "national bourgeoisie", directorate, "merchants", farmers, collective farmers, members of new agricultural enterprises, lumpen- intellectuals, working class, unemployed). The most developed model belongs to Academician T. Zaslavskaya, who identified 78 social strata in modern Russia.
Western sociologists in the twentieth century. use different approaches to social stratification:
1) subjective - self-evaluative, when the respondents themselves determine their social affiliation;
2) subjective reputational, when the respondents determine the social affiliation of each other;
3) objective (most common) - as a rule, with a status criterion. Most Western sociologists, structuring the societies of developed countries, divide them into the upper, middle and working classes, in some countries also the peasantry (for example, France, Japan, third world countries).
The upper class stands out for its wealth, corporatism and power. It makes up about 2% of modern societies, but controls up to 85-90% of the capital. It is made up of bankers, owners, presidents, party leaders, movie stars, outstanding athletes.
The middle class includes non-manual workers and is divided into three groups: the upper middle class (professionals - doctors, scientists, lawyers, engineers, etc.); intermediate middle class (teachers, nurses, actors, journalists, technicians); the lower middle class (cashiers, salespeople, photographers, policemen, etc.). The middle class makes up 30-35% in the structure of Western societies.
The working class - the class of manual workers, accounting for about 50-65% in different countries, is also divided into three layers:
1) workers of skilled manual labor (locksmiths, turners, cooks, hairdressers, etc.);
2) workers of manual semi-skilled labor (seamstresses, agricultural workers, telephone operators, bartenders, orderlies, etc.);
3) workers of unskilled labor (loaders, cleaners, kitchen workers, servants, etc.). An important feature of modern society is that, by supporting in the mass consciousness the idea of the necessity and expediency of the social hierarchy, it gives everyone a chance to test their strength in the most difficult ascent of the steps of the stratification ladder.
This creates conditions for channeling the energy generated by dissatisfaction with one's position in the hierarchical structure not to destroy the structure itself and the institutions that protect it, but to achieve personal success. A stable idea is being created in the mass consciousness about personal responsibility for one's own destiny, for one's place in the pyramid of power, prestige and privileges.
Social inequality and social stratification
Social inequality - conditions under which people have unequal access to social goods such as money, power and prestige; these are some types of relationships between people: personal inequality, inequality of opportunities to achieve desired goals (inequality of chances). Inequality of living conditions (welfare, education, etc.), inequality of results; it is a system of priorities and social advantages that regulates the factors of social survival, which may be associated with an advantageous position in the social disposition, ease of moving to the privileged strata, social strata and a whole set of characteristics that demonstrate an increase in the degree of social freedom and security.Social inequality is a system of relations emerging in society that characterizes the uneven distribution of society's scarce resources (money, power, education and prestige) between different strata, or strata, of the population, social inequality is the cause and effect of social stratification. The main measure of inequality is the amount of liquid values, in modern society this function is usually performed by money. If inequality is presented as a scale, then those who own the greatest amount of goods (the rich) will be on one pole, and those who own the least (poor) will be on the other. Wealth is expressed as a sum of money equivalent to what a person owns. Wealth and poverty set a multidimensional stratification hierarchy. The amount of money determines the place of an individual or family in social stratification.
Social inequality in power relations is manifested in the ability of a certain social subject (social stratum, or stratum) to determine in their own interests the goals and direction of the activities of other social subjects (regardless of their interests), dispose of the material, informational and status resources of society, form and impose rules and code of Conduct. The key value in measuring social inequality by power relations belongs to the disposal of resources, which allows the ruling subject to subjugate other people. Social inequality in terms of the level of education and the prestige of social status, profession, position, occupation is determined by the inequality of starting conditions or the inequality of conditions for the development of various social strata and strata (real injustice, infringement of natural human rights, creation of artificial social barriers, monopolization of conditions and rules of social production) .
Social stratification - constant ranking of social statuses and roles in the social system (from a small group to society); this is the distribution of social groups in a hierarchically ordered rank (in ascending or descending order of any sign); this is a concept denoting, firstly, the structure of society, and secondly, a system of signs of social stratification, inequality. Social stratification is the structuring of inequality between different social communities, communities or groups of people, or a hierarchical organized structure of social inequality existing in society. The term "stratification" is borrowed from geology, where it refers to vertically arranged social strata.
Social stratification is a rank stratification, when the higher, or upper, strata, which are significantly smaller in the number of members of society included in them, are in a more privileged position (in terms of the possession of resources or the possibility of receiving rewards) than the lower strata. All complex societies have several systems of stratification, according to which individuals are ranked in layers. The main types of social stratification are: economic, political and professional.
In accordance with the data, the types of social stratification of society are usually distinguished by the criterion of income (and wealth, i.e. accumulation), the criteria for influencing the behavior of members of society and the criteria associated with the successful performance of social roles, the availability of knowledge, skills, skills and intuition, which are evaluated and rewarded by society. Social stratification, fixing the natural and social inequality between people, is sustainably maintained and regulated by various institutional mechanisms, constantly reproduced and modified, which is a condition for the orderly existence of any society and a source of its development.
Historical social stratification
There are 4 main historical types of social stratification:1. Slavery is an extreme form of inequality, when some individuals are the property of others.
2. Caste - a group whose members are related by origin or legal status, belonging to which is hereditary, the transition from one caste to another is practically impossible. In India, there were 4 castes, separated by the norms of ritual purity. Large castes were divided into podcasts. A characteristic feature of the caste system was endogamy (the prohibition of unequal marriages).
3. Estate - a group that has fixed custom or law and inherited rights and obligations. Estates were based on landed property. A characteristic feature of the estate is the presence of social symbols and signs: titles, uniforms, orders, titles. The estate system reached its perfection in medieval Western Europe. As a rule, two privileged classes are distinguished - the clergy and the nobility - and the third, which included all other strata of society.
4. Classes have a number of features that distinguish them from the other three stratification systems:
1) Classes are not based on law and religious traditions, belonging to a class is not associated with the inheritance of privileges enshrined in law or custom.
2) An individual can become a member of a class through his efforts, and not just "receive" it at birth.
3) Classes arise depending on the difference in the economic situation of groups of individuals, inequality in ownership and control over economic resources.
4) In other stratification systems, inequality is expressed primarily through personal relationships of duty and duty - between a slave and a master, a landowner and a serf. Class systems, on the other hand, function through large-scale connections of an impersonal nature.
The concept of class was introduced into circulation by the French historians Thierry and Guizot in the 18th century. There are many class concepts in modern sociology. Let us consider two main approaches to the analysis of classes - Marxist and gradational.
Marxist approach. The concept of "class" is most actively used by Marxists, but there is no definition of this category in the works of K. Marx. According to Marx, the main class-forming feature is ownership of the means of production.
The most important manifestation of class relations was the exploitation of one class by another. At each stage of the development of society, K. Marx singled out the main classes corresponding to a given mode of production (slaves and slave owners, feudal lords and peasants, capitalists and workers), and minor classes - remnants of old or embryos of new formations (landowners under capitalism). The division of society into classes is the result of the social division of labor and the formation of private property relations.
According to Marx, a class in its development goes through two stages - from a "class in itself" to a "class for itself". The “class in itself” is an emerging class that has not realized its class interests. The second is an already formed class.
The gradation approach takes into account not one, but several criteria of class formation (occupation, source and amount of income, level of education, lifestyle).
Among the models of stratification adopted in Western sociology, the Lloyd Warner model has become the most widely used. He singled out three classes and two strata in each class.
The highest highest - dynasties (wealthy families of noble origin).
The lowest highest - people of high income, recently wealthy (nouveau riche).
Higher average - highly qualified people engaged in mental work, with high incomes (lawyers, doctors, scientific elite, managers), representatives of medium-sized businesses.
The lower middle group consists of unskilled "white-collar workers" (clerical workers, secretaries, cashiers, waiters), as well as small proprietors.
Higher lower - workers of manual labor.
Lower lower - beggars, unemployed, homeless, foreign workers.
Forms of social stratification
The specific aspects of social stratification are numerous. However, all their diversity can be reduced to three main forms: 1) economic, 2) political and 3) professional stratification. As a rule, they are all closely intertwined. People who belong to the highest stratum in one respect usually belong to the same stratum in other respects, and vice versa. Representatives of the highest economic strata simultaneously belong to the highest political and professional strata. The poor, as a rule, are disenfranchised and are in the lower strata of the professional hierarchy.This is the general rule, although there are many exceptions. So, for example, the richest are not always at the top of the political or professional pyramid, just as the poor do not always occupy the lowest places in the political and professional hierarchies. And this means that the interconnection of the three forms of social stratification is far from perfect, because the various layers of each of the forms do not completely coincide with each other ... they coincide with each other, but only partially, i.e. up to a certain extent.
Lumpens and outcasts
These two groups of the population, as it were, fall out of the stable social structure of society.
Lumpen - the proletariat (from German Lumpen - "rags") - a term introduced by Karl Marx to refer to the lower strata of the proletariat. Later, all declassed strata of the population (tramps, beggars, criminal elements, and others) began to be called "lumpen". In most cases, a lumpen is a person who does not have any property and lives on odd jobs.
Lumpen - declassed elements, people without social roots, a moral code, ready to unreasonably obey the strong, that is, possessing this moment real power.
The lumpenization of society means an increase in the proportion of these strata in the population and the spread of the psychology of the lumpen in conditions of a social crisis.
Marginal (from French marginal, Latin margo - edge, border) - 1) located on the border of two environments; 2) a person who, by his position, finds himself outside a certain social stratum, group (marginal personality, marginal).
It is often used as a negative assessment in relation to lumpen and outcasts, as well as in a positive sense - in relation to people who creatively overcome stereotypes and established principles of activity.
positive and negative sides marginality.
Marginality is usually associated with painful psychological experiences. It can be viewed as a negative phenomenon. And indeed, being outside of society is far from the most pleasant thing in life. This situation is dangerous, because a person may begin to feel superfluous, unnecessary.
On the other hand, it is this position that can become an impetus that will force a person to make efforts and either adapt to society, restore his position in it, or change social structure. Marginals play an extremely important role in the formation of new social communities (religious, professional, etc.). There is a close connection between the emergence of large masses of people who, for some reason, found themselves outside the usual way of life, and the emergence of new social formations, which has been repeatedly noted by sociologists.
Changing the degree of social inequality in the process of history.
Pareto believed that the degree of economic inequality, the proportion of rich people in the population is a constant thing. Karl Marx believed that in the modern world there is a process of economic differentiation - the rich are getting richer, and the poor are getting poorer, the middle class is disappearing. Pitirim Sorokin refuted these hypotheses with facts in hand and proved that the level of economic inequality fluctuates over time around one constant value.
Comparison of the stages of development of society in terms of inequality shows:
1) In societies of hunters and gatherers of plants, for example, among the Papuans of the island of Kivai, inequality occurs to the least extent.
2) In horticultural societies, the political leader, the merchant and the priest are the most influential. The degree of social inequality is low.
3) Inequality is most clearly manifested in agrarian societies, where hereditary monarchy and slavery arose.
4) In industrial societies, inequality and concentration of power are less than in agrarian ones.
Figures of inequality (stratification profile):
1) pyramid;
2) rhombus.
The horizontal width of the figure indicates the number of people with a given amount of income. At the top of the figure is the elite. Over the past hundred years, Western society has evolved from a pyramidal structure to a diamond-shaped one. In the pyramidal structure, there is a vast majority of the poor and a small handful of oligarchs. The diamond-shaped structure has a large share of the middle class. A rhomboid structure is preferred over a pyramidal structure, as in the first case, a large middle class will not allow a handful of poor people to start a civil war. And in the second case, the vast majority, consisting of the poor, can easily overturn the social system, arrange civil war and senseless slaughter. Russia's challenge is to move from the triangular shape of inequality that exists in Russia today to a diamond shape.
The middle class is a set of social strata of the population that occupy an intermediate position in the stratification system of society between the lower class (the poor) and the upper class (the rich). In developed countries, the middle class is the largest group of the population.
The functions of the middle class are traditionally considered to be the stabilization of society and the reproduction of a skilled workforce.
The concept of social stratification
Basics modern approach to the study of social stratification were laid by M. Weber, who considered the social structure of society as a multidimensional system in which, along with classes and the property relations that give rise to them, status and power occupy an important place.The most developed functionalist concept of social stratification (T. Parsons, E. Shils and others), according to which the stratification system of society is a differentiation of social roles and positions and is an objective need of any developed society. On the one hand, it is due to the division of labor and social differentiation of various groups, and on the other hand, it is the result of the action of the prevailing system of values and cultural standards in society that determine the significance of a particular activity and legitimize the emerging social inequality.
In the theory of social action, T. Parsons makes an attempt to develop universal criteria for the concept of social stratification:
"quality", i.e. prescribing to an individual a certain characteristic, position (for example, responsibility, competence, etc.);
"execution", i.e. evaluation of the activity of the individual in comparison with the activities of other people;
"possession" material values, talent, skill, cultural resources.
In empirical sociology, the following approaches to the study of the concept of social stratification are distinguished: "self-evaluative", or the method of "class identification", when the sociologist gives the respondent the right to attribute himself to some conditional scale of the class composition of the population; the “reputation assessment” method, in which the respondents are asked to act as experts, that is, to assess the social position of each other or social groups known to them; "objective approach", when the researcher operates with some objective criterion of social differentiation; most often based on a social-class scale associated with the concept of "socio-economic status", usually covering three variables - the prestige of the profession, the level of education and the level of income.
When studying social stratification and mobility using the "objective approach" method, a seven-class vertical scale is often used:
1 - the highest class of professionals, administrators;
2 - mid-level technical specialists;
3 - commercial class;
4 - petty bourgeoisie;
5 - technicians and workers performing managerial functions;
6 - skilled workers;
7 - unskilled workers.
A generalization of multidimensional stratification is its geometric model, which conditionally represents a social space consisting of a series of interconnected axes formed by various measurable features (occupation, income, education, housing, etc.), along which an individual or group moves.
The theories under consideration are a component of the concept of social stratification, in which the concept of "status" is developed (from Latin status - state, position). Social status is the position of an individual in society in accordance with age, gender, origin, profession, marital status.
Distinguish the status of innate (prescribed) (social origin, nationality) and achievable (achievable) (education, qualifications, etc.). At the same time, each person, having a certain social status (according to which he occupies a certain place in the social hierarchy), combines several statuses in his person, being, for example, simultaneously a father, husband, governor, member of a political party, captain of a sports team, etc. e. Sometimes these statuses come into conflict with each other. In this case, the individual is forced to prefer one status to another.
The concept of "social status" is closely related to the concept of "social role". In this sense, the latter turns out to be the dynamic side of social status, its function, expected behavior depending on a certain position of a person in society.
With the help of theories of social status, some sociologists interpret the concept of "class struggle" as the struggle of individuals for a better social role in conditions when the highest roles and statuses are numerically limited and the demand for them exceeds the supply.
Features of social stratification
Nomenklatura clans in the state apparatus, trying to put the course of reforms at their service, are faced with protests from broad social strata seeking to establish in society the principles of social justice and freedom. The struggle of forces and strata associated with a criminalized and "honest" economy is acquiring the most acute forms, up to acts of political terror, etc.At the same time, the formation of modern social stratification in Russia has a certain specificity and history. There were latent processes of the emergence of quasi-private property in the country (for example, in the form of individual-corporate property of the highest administrative bureaucracy, the accumulation of resources in the shadow economy), which subsequently contributed to the formation of a proto-class of large owners (nomenklatura, large representatives of the trade sector). The open nomenklatura privatization that began led to the concentration by the ruling class in their hands of the state property that they formally disposed of in Soviet time. The establishment by the class of managers of numerous funds, joint ventures and structures in place of state institutions and organizations is the mechanism that contributed to the redistribution of public resources into the individual property of managers. Thus, while retaining power, the nomenklatura also acquired property. In her person, a group of very rich and influential people was legally formed in the country.
Competitive capitalism began to gradually take shape in the country (in the form of directorial and check privatization, enrichment of officials through licensing and quotas in the regulation of export-import operations, the emergence of a layer of small and medium-sized entrepreneurs). The corporative nature of relations between government and business has led to the formation of favorable conditions for the growth of big capital. For example, if in the USA it took an average of 47 years to earn a fortune of 10 million dollars, and in South Korea - 13 years, then in Russia in those years it was possible in just 3-4 years. In the future, the growing influence of big capital led to its close rapprochement with power and entry into power (oligarchization). At the same time, support for medium and small businesses remained on the periphery of the authorities' attention.
The predominant orientation of the state to support big capital and the protectionist policy towards representatives of the ruling class led to rapid social stratification and mass downward social mobility. A significant group of poor people has formed in the country, according to various sources, today it covers from 40 to 80% of the population. If, for example, the minimum wage in the United States today is approximately 115–120% of the subsistence minimum, then in the Russian Federation it is only 17.5%. Such a significant decline in the standard of living of the population shows that at present stratification tends to "collapse differences" to its one politically significant dimension - economic.
According to a number of Russian scientists, at present the following stratification has developed in the country: the elite (large entrepreneurs and owners, politicians, the highest bureaucracy, the generals) - 0.5%; the top layer (high-ranking officials, businessmen, highly paid specialists) - 6-7%; the middle stratum (small private entrepreneurs, employed specialists) - 21%; the base layer (semi-intelligentsia, workers of mass professions in the sphere of trade and service, skilled workers and peasants) - 65%; the bottom layer (technical employees, unskilled workers, lumpen) - 7%.
The social stratification of Russian society has revealed new prestigious groups, which began to include financiers, bankers, employees of tax structures, and lawyers. At the same time, in a number of youth strata, criminal ethics became widespread and gained special authority. And this is not accidental, given that at present the shadow economy (directly and in parallel) employs a large part of the workforce. Of these, 9 million Russians took part in the criminal business (covering more than 40 thousand economic objects). Corruption has become an attribute of the state structure.
In recent years, despite the presence of low consumer standards and the difficulties experienced by the country, there has been a gradual formation of the middle class. This process is associated primarily with a certain restructuring of the intellectual sphere, bringing the number of workers in science, education and culture into line with the opportunities and needs of society in these types of activities, as well as the gradual formation of a layer of small and medium-sized entrepreneurs.
A significant role in the evolution of social relations, which ambiguously affects the political stability of society and the diversity of political life in the country, is played by: migration from the CIS countries, the strengthening of regional characteristics, the complication of the cultural appearance of groups. Experience shows that the mitigation of political tension in Russia, as in other countries with a transitional social structure, is usually associated with increased social orientation government activities (especially in relation to the least protected segments of the population), with the fight against crime and the privileges of the state bureaucracy, expanding opportunities for professional retraining of citizens and a number of other measures.
class social stratification
Class stratification is characteristic of an open type of society. It differs significantly from both the caste system and the class system.Differences in class stratification are manifested in the following:
1) classes are not created on the basis of religious doctrine or on the basis of legal norms;
2) membership in classes is not inherited;
3) the boundaries between classes are blurred rather than rigidly defined; classes are mobile;
4) the division into classes depends on economic differences (associated with inequality in the ownership or control of material resources);
5) the level of social mobility is higher in a class society (there are no formal restrictions, but mobility is constrained by starting opportunities and claims).
A class is a social group of people who own or do not own the means of production, occupy a certain place in the system of social division of labor and are characterized by a specific way of earning income.
The most influential theoretical approaches in the definition of class stratification belong to K. Marx and M. Weber. According to Marx, a class is a community of people in direct relation to the means of production. He singled out in society at various stages of its existence the exploited and the exploiters.
The stratification of society according to K. Marx is one-dimensional and is connected only with classes, since its main basis is the economic position, and all other grounds (rights, privileges, power, influence) fit into the space of the economic position, are combined with it.
M. Weber defined classes as groups of people who have a similar position in a market economy, receive similar economic rewards and have similar life chances. Class divisions stem from economic differences not related to property. Such sources include professional skill, rare specialty, high qualification, intellectual property ownership, etc.
M. Weber gave not only class stratification, considering it only a part of the structuring necessary for a complex capitalist society. Weber proposed a three-dimensional division: if economic differences (by wealth) give rise to class stratification, then spiritual (by prestige) - status, and political (by access to power) - party. In the first case, we are talking about the life chances of social strata, in the second - about the image and style of their life, in the third - about the possession of power and influence on it. Most sociologists consider the Weberian scheme to be more flexible, corresponding to modern society.
Weber's ideas formed the basis of modern stratification. At present, the generally accepted sociological model of the stratification structure of society in some countries (for example, in the UK) is the division of the population into three classes - working, intermediate, higher.
Manual workers are classified as the working class, non-manual workers are classified as the intermediate class, and managers and professionals are classified as the upper class.
In a country as sociologically developed as the United States, different sociologists offer different typologies of classes. In one there are seven, in another six, in the third five, and so on, social strata.
The first typology of classes was proposed by the USA in the 40s. 20th century American sociologist Lloyd Warner:
- the upper-upper class included the so-called "old families". They consisted of the most successful businessmen and those who were called professionals. They lived in privileged parts of the city;
- the lower-upper class in terms of material well-being was not inferior to the upper-upper class, but did not include the old tribal families;
- the upper-middle class consisted of owners and professionals who had less material wealth than those from the two upper classes, but they actively participated in the public life of the city and lived in fairly comfortable areas;
- the lower-middle class consisted of lower employees and skilled workers;
- the upper-lower class included low-skilled workers employed in local factories and living in relative prosperity;
- the lower-lower class consisted of those who are commonly called the "social bottom" - these are the inhabitants of basements, attics, slums and other places unsuitable for life. They constantly felt an inferiority complex due to hopeless poverty and constant humiliation. In all two-part words, the first - denotes a stratum or layer, and the second - the class to which this layer belongs.
The middle class (with its layers) is always distinguished from the working class. The working class may include the unemployed, the unemployed, the homeless, the poor, etc. As a rule, highly skilled workers are not included in the working class, but in the middle, but in its lower stratum, which is filled mainly by low-skilled mental workers - employees .
Another option is possible: workers are not included in the middle class, but two layers are left in the general working class. Specialists are included in the next layer of the middle class (the concept of "specialist" implies at least a college education).
The upper stratum of the middle class is filled mainly by "professionals" - specialists who, as a rule, have a university education and extensive practical experience, are highly skilled in their field, are engaged in creative work and belong to the so-called category of self-employed, i.e. having their own practice , their business (lawyers, doctors, scientists, teachers, etc.).
The middle class is a unique phenomenon in the world history of the stratification system of society. It appeared in the 20th century. The middle class acts as a stabilizer of society, and this is its specific function. The larger it is, the more stable the favorable political and economic atmosphere in society.
Representatives of the middle class are always interested in preserving the system that gives them such opportunities for realization and well-being. The thinner and weaker the middle class, the closer the polar points of stratification (lower and upper classes) are to each other, the more likely they are to clash. As a rule, the middle class includes those who have economic independence, that is, they own an enterprise, firm, office, private practice, their own business, as well as scientists, priests, doctors, lawyers, middle managers, the petty bourgeoisie, in other words, social basis society.
The essence of social stratification
There are many groups in society, but they are not all equal, just as the people who make up these groups are not equal. Those. there is always social inequality. However, the levels and forms of social inequality can be different.The central concept in the analysis of social inequality is the concept of social stratification.
Social stratification (from Latin stratum - layer, layer) - stratification, stratification of groups that have different access to social benefits due to their position in the social hierarchy. A stratum includes many people who are similar in some way, who feel connected to each other. Economic, political, socio-demographic, cultural characteristics can act as a sign, but they must necessarily be status, i.e. have a ranking character.
In sociology, there are various methodological approaches to the analysis of the essence, origins and prospects for the development of social stratification.
|
functional approach |
Conflict Approach |
evolutionary approach |
|
|
1. Stratification is natural, necessary, inevitable, because it is associated with a variety of needs, functions and social roles. |
1. Stratification is not necessary, but not inevitable. It arises from the conflict of groups. |
1. Stratification is not always necessary and useful. It appears not only because of natural needs, but also on the basis of the conflict that arises as a result of the distribution of the surplus product. |
|
|
2. Remuneration is carried out in accordance with the role and therefore fair. |
2. Stratification is not fair. It is determined by the interests of those in power. |
2. Reward can be fair or unfair. |
|
|
3. Stratification ensures the optimal functioning of society. |
3. Stratification hinders the normal functioning of society. |
3. Stratification can help or hinder development. |
|
M. Weber identified three social resources that generate social stratification:
1. Ownership.
2. Power.
3. Prestige.
In other words, a social group located on more high level social hierarchy, has large amounts of power, property and prestige.
P. Sorokin proposed the idea of multidimensional stratification, that is, in his opinion, there is not a single stratification pyramid, but three:
Economic stratification.
- Political stratification.
- Professional stratification.
High social status in one stratification is not always associated with high status in another stratification (for example, the President of the United States has the highest status in political stratification, but his status in economic stratification is much lower).
Back | |
Social stratification: concept, criteria, types
To get started, watch the video tutorial on social stratification:
The concept of social stratification
Social stratification is the process of arranging individuals and social groups in horizontal layers (strata). This process is associated primarily with both economic and human causes. The economic reasons for social stratification is that resources are limited. And because of this, they must be rationally disposed of. That is why the ruling class stands out - it owns the resources, and the exploited class - it obeys the ruling class.
Among the universal causes of social stratification are:
psychological reasons. People are not equal in their inclinations and abilities. Some people can concentrate on something for long hours: reading, watching movies, creating something new. Others do not need anything and are not interested. Some can go to the goal through all obstacles, and failures only spur them on. Others give up at the first opportunity - it's easier for them to moan and whine that everything is bad.
biological reasons. People are also not equal from birth: some are born with two arms and legs, others are disabled from birth. It is clear that it is extremely difficult to achieve something if you are disabled, especially in Russia.
Objective causes of social stratification. These include, for example, place of birth. If you were born in a more or less normal country, where you will be taught to read and write for free and there are at least some social guarantees, that's good. You have a good chance of being successful. So, if you were born in Russia even in the most remote village and you are a kid, at least you can join the army, and then stay to serve under the contract. Then you may be sent to a military school. It's better than drinking moonshine with your fellow villagers, and by the age of 30 to die in a drunken brawl.
Well, if you were born in some country in which statehood does not really exist, and local princes come to your village with machine guns at the ready and kill anyone at random, and whoever they hit are taken into slavery, then write your life is gone, and together with her and your future.
Criteria of social stratification
The criteria of social stratification include: power, education, income and prestige. Let's analyze each criterion separately.
Power. People are not equal in terms of power. The level of power is measured by (1) the number of people who are under your control, and also (2) the amount of your authority. But the presence of this criterion alone (even the greatest power) does not mean that you are in the highest stratum. For example, a teacher, a teacher of power is more than enough, but the income is lame.
Education. The higher the level of education, the more opportunities. If you have a higher education, this opens up certain horizons for your development. At first glance, it seems that in Russia this is not the case. But that's just how it seems. Because the majority of graduates are dependent - they should be hired. They do not understand that with their higher education they may well open their own business and increase their third criterion of social stratification - income.
Income is the third criterion of social stratification. It is thanks to this defining criterion that one can judge which social class a person belongs to. If the income is from 500 thousand rubles per capita and more per month - then to the highest; if from 50 thousand to 500 thousand rubles (per capita), then you belong to the middle class. If from 2000 rubles to 30 thousand then your class is basic. And also further.
Prestige is the subjective perception people have of your , is a criterion of social stratification. Previously, it was believed that prestige is expressed solely in income, because if you have enough money, you can dress more beautifully and better, and in society, as you know, they are met by clothes ... But even 100 years ago, sociologists realized that prestige can be expressed in the prestige of the profession (professional status).
Types of social stratification
Types of social stratification can be distinguished, for example, by spheres of society. A person in his life can make a career in (become a famous politician), in the cultural (become a recognizable cultural figure), in the social sphere (become, for example, an honorary citizen).
In addition, types of social stratification can be distinguished on the basis of one or another type of stratification systems. The criterion for singling out such systems is the presence or absence of social mobility.
There are several such systems: caste, clan, slave, estate, class, etc. Some of them are discussed above in the video on social stratification.
You must understand that this topic is extremely large, and it is impossible to cover it in one video tutorial and in one article. Therefore, we suggest that you purchase a video course that already contains all the nuances on the topic of social stratification, social mobility and other related topics:
Sincerely, Andrey Puchkov
