Social structure and stratification. Sociology. Social inequality

One of the central places in sociology is occupied by the problem of social inequality. Uneven distribution of sociocultural goods and values ​​depending on social status individual or social groups is understood as social inequality. Social

inequality refers to people's unequal access to economic

resources, social benefits and political power. The most common way to measure inequality is to compare the highest and lowest levels of income in a given society.

There are several approaches to assessing the problem of social inequality. Conservatives argued that the unequal distribution of social benefits serves as a tool for solving the main problems of society. Supporters of the radical approach sharply criticize the existing social order and believe that social inequality is a mechanism of exploitation and is associated with the struggle for valuable and scarce goods and services. Modern theories of inequality in in a broad sense belong either to the first or second direction. Theories based on the conservative tradition are called functionalist; those that are rooted in radicalism, are called conflict theories.

According to functionalist theory, social inequality is a necessary property of any normally developing social system. Wilbert Moore and Kingsley Davis argue that social stratification is necessary; society cannot do without stratification and classes. A system of stratification is required to provide individuals with incentives to perform the duties associated with their position.

Social inequality - a system of relations emerging in society, which characterizes the uneven distribution of scarce resources of society (money, power, education and prestige) between different strata or segments of the population. The main measures of inequality are money.

Conflict theorists believe that stratification in society exists because it benefits individuals and groups who have power over others. From the point of view of conflictology, society is an arena where people fight for privileges, prestige and power, and groups with advantages secure it through coercion.

Conflict theory is largely based on the ideas of Karl Marx. Karl Marx believed that the basis of the social system are economic interests and related production relations, which form the basis of society. Since the fundamental interests of the main subjects of capitalist society (workers and capitalists) are diametrically opposed and irreconcilable, conflict in this society is inevitable. At a certain stage of their development, material productive forces, K. Marx believed, come into a state of conflict with existing production relations, primarily with property relations. This leads to social revolution and the overthrow of capitalism.

According to Marx, ownership of the means of production is one of the sources of power. Another source is control over people, possession of controls. This point can be illustrated with the example Soviet Union. The elite was the party bureaucracy, which formally controlled both nationalized and socialized property and the entire life of society. The role of bureaucracy in society, i.e. monopoly control of national income and national wealth puts it in a special privileged position.

Inequality can be represented by the relationship of concepts "rich", " poor". Poverty is the economic and sociocultural state of people who have minimum quantity liquid assets and limited access to social benefits. Poverty is a special image and style of life, norms of behavior and psychology passed on from generation to generation. Therefore, sociologists talk about poverty as a special subculture. The most common and easiest to calculate way to measure inequality– comparison of the lowest and highest incomes in a given country. Another way is analysis of the share of family income, spent on food.

Economic inequality is that a minority of the population always owns the majority of national wealth. The highest incomes are received by the smallest part of society, and the average and lowest incomes are received by the majority of the population. Respectively, geometric figure, illustrating the profile of the stratification of Russian society, will resemble a cone; in the USA, the figure will resemble a rhombus.

Poverty threshold – This is the amount of money officially established as the minimum income, which is enough for an individual or family only to purchase food, clothing and pay for housing - the subsistence level. Each region has its own cost of living and, accordingly, its own poverty line.

In sociology, a distinction is made between absolute and relative poverty. Under absolute poverty is understood as a state in which an individual, with his income, is not able to satisfy even the basic needs for food, housing, clothing, or is able to satisfy only minimal needs. Under relative poverty the impossibility of maintaining a decent standard of living is understood. Relative poverty measures how poor a particular individual or family is compared to other people. Working poor- Russian phenomenon. Today, their low incomes are due, first of all, to the unreasonably low level of wages and pensions.

Poverty, unemployment, economic and social instability in society contribute to the emergence of a social bottom: beggars begging for alms; "homeless"; street children; street prostitutes. These are people deprived of social resources, stable connections, who have lost basic social skills and dominant values ​​of society.

Let us characterize six social strata modern Russia:

1) upper- economic, political and security elite;

2) upper middle- medium and large entrepreneurs;

3) average- small entrepreneurs, managers production sector, the highest intelligentsia, the working elite, career military personnel;

4) base- the mass intelligentsia, the bulk of the working class, peasants, trade and service workers;

5) lower- unskilled workers, long-term unemployed, single pensioners;

6) "social bottom"- homeless people released from prison.

Social inequality causes social protest and confrontation. The entire history of the class structure of society is accompanied by ideological and political struggle for social equality.

Egalitarianism(French - equality) is an ideological and theoretical movement that advocates universal equality, up to the equal distribution of material and sociocultural values. Manifestations of egalitarianism can be found in social movements Ancient Greece and Rome, in the text of the Bible. The ideas of egalitarianism found their support among the Jacobins during the Great french revolution, among the Bolsheviks in Russia on turn of the 19th century and XX centuries, among the leaders of national liberation movements in third world countries - in the XX century. Egalitarianism can be classified as a radical ideological and political movement.

Related information.

Crib

Sociology, social work and statistics

All societies, with the exception of the simplest hunter-gatherers, are characterized by all three types of inequality identified by M. Inequality characterizes the uneven distribution of scarce resources of society, money, power of education and prestige between different strata or layers of the population. Inequality exists in all societies. Inequality increased during hunting, reached a maximum during agriculture, and began to decline in industrial and post-industrial societies.

Social inequality- a specific form of social differentiation in which individuals, social groups, strata, classes are at different levels of the vertical social hierarchy and have unequal life chances and opportunities to satisfy needs.

Inequality refers to the unequal access of large social groups of people (strata, strata, estates, castes, classes) to economic resources, social benefits and political power. Inequality exists in all societies. Two indicators are used to measure inequality: wealth (the stock of assets) and income (the flow of cash receipts per unit of time).

Social inequality is the result of unequal distribution of economic benefits. In England in 1972, the richest 20% of English people owned 82% of the wealth, with the remaining 80% holding 18%. Over time, this trend has changed little, since the economic structure of society has not changed. Cross-country analysis, expressed in decile coefficients, showed that in modern Russia the level of inequality is at around 12-13 (in the USSR it did not exceed 5, in Sweden - 6). This clearly demonstrates the deepening gap between a thin layer of rich people and the impoverished majority of society.

Sociologists have proven that different groups population have unequal life chances. They buy different quantities and qualities of food, clothing, housing, etc. People having more money, eat better, live in more comfortable houses, prefer a personal car public transport, can afford an expensive vacation, etc. But besides the obvious economic benefits the wealthy classes 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), etc.

However, social inequality can be expressed in terms not only of class, but of gender and race. Given equal income, children of black and non-white parents may have worse life chances than children of white parents.

If society limits access to a prestigious education or quality medical care just because a person has no or very little money, then this order of things is regarded as social injustice. Typically, three concepts - inequality, equality and justice - are analyzed in close connection with each other. Young revolutionaries in 1917 wanted to establish social justice on one sixth of the land, for which they sought to destroy social inequality and make all people equal. But it turned out that achieving the ideal is not at all easy. If two people make different labor contributions to the prosperity of society, then their equal income will be assessed by one of them as an unfair assessment of his merits. Socialism has never been able to establish a fair society that suits all segments of the population. The ruling class had more goods and better life chances. It was the social injustice and social inequality hidden within that destroyed this social system, beautiful in its idea.

Equality has three meanings:

1. equality before the law, legal (formal) equality - is expressed in the equality of all citizens before the law (this is a relatively new understanding of equality that appeared in Western Europe in the XVII-XVIII centuries);
2. equality of opportunity - everyone has the same chance to achieve in life everything they deserve thanks to their merits and abilities (this is related to the problem of social mobility, unfulfilled desires, an unfortunate combination of circumstances that prevented them from being realized, underestimation of merits and lack of recognition, unequal start in life);
3. equality of results - everyone should have the same starting opportunities, regardless of talent, effort and ability (the ideal embodiment of such equality is socialism).

The three concepts of equality are not entirely compatible. F. Hayek believed that the combination of equality of opportunity and equality of results destroys equality before the law. This happens because in order to achieve equality of results it is necessary to violate the principle of equality of all before the law and apply different rules in relation to ordinary people and those in power. A violation of equality before the law does not necessarily occur because malicious intent. For example, pensioners, disabled people and women have unequal opportunities and ability to work; if they are not given privileges, their standard of living will sharply decrease. F. Hayek believed: inequality is a necessary payment for material well-being in a market society.

All societies, with the exception of the simplest hunter-gatherers, are characterized by all three types of inequality identified by M. Weber in the understanding of power: inequality of remuneration, inequality, inequality of access to political power.

The most common and easy-to-calculate way to measure inequality is to compare the size of the lowest and highest incomes in a given country. P. Sorokin compared different countries and different historical eras. For example, in medieval Germany the ratio of top to bottom income was 10,000:1, and in medieval England it was 600:1.

Based on the level of inequality and poverty (the second is a consequence of the first), individuals, peoples, countries, and eras can be compared with each other. Cross-historical and cross-cultural analyzes are widely used in macrosociology. They reveal new aspects of the development of human society.

According to Gerhard Lenski's (1970) hypothesis, the degree of inequality varies across historical eras. The eras of slavery and feudalism were characterized by deep inequality.

G. Lenski explains the lower degree of inequality in industrial society by the lower concentration of power among managers, the presence of democratic governments, the struggle for influence between trade unions and entrepreneurs, high level social mobility and developed system social security, which raises the standard of living of the poor to certain, quite acceptable standards. Other points of view on the dynamics of inequality were expressed by K. Marx and P. Sorokin.

According to Marx, minimal inequality or its complete absence was observed in the primitive communal system. Inequality appeared and began to deepen in antagonistic formations (slavery and feudalism), reached its maximum during the period of classical capitalism and will grow rapidly as this formation develops. Marx's theory can be called "escalation of inequality." His theory of the absolute and relative impoverishment of the proletariat states that "the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer."

In contrast to K. Marx, P. Sorokin argued that there is no constant increase or decrease in inequality in the history of mankind. IN different eras and in different countries inequality either increases or decreases, i.e. fluctuates (oscillates).

The first to defend social inequality as a necessary element of stratification, fulfilling positive functions, performed in 1945 by Kingsley Davis and Wilbert Moore. By stratification they understood the uneven distribution of material wealth, power functions and social prestige depending on the functional importance (significance) of the position. The importance of a position is determined by its assessment, firstly, by the person as an object social action, secondly, society itself. According to K. Davis and W. Moore, “every society, whether simple or complex, must differentiate people by prestige and respect and must have a certain degree of institutionalized inequality.” Social inequality is a naturally evolving mechanism by which society ensures that the most qualified individuals are promoted to critical positions.

However, it is very difficult to determine exactly which positions are most important for society. In different societies, the same positions in stratification may be valued differently, but in any society there are positions that require specific abilities and training that are functionally more important than other positions. For example, the position of a company manager is functionally more important than the position of a loader. Both positions are necessary for the company, but the position of manager requires specific abilities and training.

According to Davis and Moore, functionally important positions should be rewarded accordingly. In this case, society will be able to ensure the promotion of qualified people to the most important positions. The rewards must be attractive to entice people to undertake the responsibilities associated with these positions.

The most valuable positions are those that require a) unique (rare) natural talent to fill and/or b) a great deal of preparation and training. Both qualities are extremely rare among the population.

Thus, social inequality performs a number of very important functions. On the contrary, universal equality deprives people of incentives for advancement, the desire to exert maximum effort and ability to perform duties (they will feel that they get no more for their work than they would get if they did nothing all day).

The functional theory of inequality of W. Moore and K. Davis formed the basis of the theory of social stratification and managerial hierarchy they created.

The functional theory of stratification comes from:

1. the principle of equal opportunity;
2. the principle of survival of the fittest;
3. psychological determinism, according to which success at work is determined by individual psychological qualities - motivation, need for achievement, intelligence, etc.
4. principles of work ethics, according to which success in work is a sign of God's grace, failure is the result only of a lack of good qualities, etc.

According to the functional theory of stratification, the highest management positions in society should be occupied by the most capable and qualified people. The higher the position in the hierarchy, the more capable and qualified a person should be.

The higher the place in the hierarchy, the higher quality the accepted materials should be. management decisions. The higher the quality of the decision made, the higher the responsibility should be. The higher the responsibility for the decision made, the more power this person should have to implement this decision.

The higher the quality and responsibility for the decision made, the more stringent the selection of candidates applying for high places in the hierarchy should be. Filter barriers should be as rigid as possible on the upper steps of the pyramid.

Economic resources in modern society are not distributed equally and people are aware of this. Thus, the income gap in the United States is 10 times greater than in Sweden. The rich in any society have wealth that exceeds the income of the lower class by hundreds and thousands of times.

Although inequality creates discontent among large numbers of people and weakens the social unity of a nation, modern society remains remarkably stable. Sociologists explain the mystery of the stability of social stratification based on inequality by the functional usefulness of the pyramidal structure of society, which makes it possible to evaluate and reward individual contributions in proportion to the merits of the individual and promote the most deserving individuals to the top.

The theory of W. Moore and K. Davis is aimed at explaining positive and negative consequences inequalities. Among the negative consequences is social outrage over inequality, which sometimes develops into open conflict. The elite and groups of the richest, trying to maintain their privileges and predominant position in society, block the advancement of talented and enterprising representatives of the lower classes to the top. Inequality is fueled by the passivity of the lower classes, resigned to their fate and fatalistically believing that under the existing system of government they will never have a chance to come forward and actively participate in political life countries.

Social inequality is a state of affairs in a society or individual community when its members have unequal access to social benefits such as wealth, power and prestige.

Any society is always structured on many grounds - national, social class, demographic, settlement, etc. Structuring, that is, people belonging to certain social, professional, socio-demographic groups, can give rise to social inequality. Even natural genetic or physical differences between people can form the basis for the formation of unequal relationships! But the main thing in society is those differences, those objective factors that give rise to social inequality among people. Inequality is an enduring fact of every society. Ralf Dahrendorf wrote: “Even in a prosperous society, the unequal status of people remains an important enduring phenomenon... Of course, these differences are no longer based on direct violence and legal norms on which the system of privileges in a caste or class society was based. However, in addition to more gross divisions according to the size of property and income, prestige and power, our society is characterized by many differences of rank - so subtle and at the same time so deeply rooted that claims about the disappearance of all forms inequalities as a result of equalizing processes can be perceived, at least, with skepticism."

Social differences are those that are generated social factors: division of labor, way of life life , social roles that are performed by individuals or social groups.

A structured society can be represented as a set of interconnected and interdependent areas social life: economic, political, spiritual, social, in which the family and household sphere is sometimes distinguished. In each of these areas social life there is its own social stratification, its own structure. Social differences between people determine social structure. It primarily reveals the economic structure of society. The main elements of this structure are classes, social and professional groups, and strata.

The largest social stratification formation in society is class. We should not forget K. Marx's thesis about the fundamental importance of social classes in the history of human society.

The word "class" comes from Ancient Rome, where it was used to divide the population into separate groups for tax purposes. At the top level were the Assidia - the richest Romans, at the bottom - the proletarians.

Plato in Ancient Greece saw two classes - rich and poor. Aristotle divided society into greedy upper class, the lower - the slave class and the respectable middle class, which can be trusted to care for the common good, since it has moderate virtues and vices.

The scientific concept of class appeared in the 19th century. Its author is K. Marx. He saw the entire history of society in the conflict of classes. Hence the idea of ​​a classless society, a society of complete social integration, social equality. K. Marx divided his contemporary society into two main classes, primarily in relation to private property. Following his logic, we can assume that the socialist system ensures complete social equality, because property has turned into national or state property, to which all members of society, all social groups must have equal treatment. However, it was precisely on the basis of public property that the nomenklatura, privileges flourished, and the shadow economy emerged. Why did the socialist experiment end in failure?

Firstly, in any society, in addition to owning property, someone must exercise operational economic control over it. The ability to distribute material and monetary Resources often turns out to be more important and beneficial than a direct loss of property. In this option, the manager has the advantage of irresponsibility, because he is dealing with someone else's property. Thus, if an army of officials has poor management, the risk is small, but the social benefits are obvious.

Secondly, society always has a certain state, political organization, which means that leaders, government managers, and officials appear who objectively must have more rights, otherwise they simply will not be able to perform the functions of government. In almost any society, such social groups occupy a certain status which objectively gives rise to social inequality.

Written story humanity does not yet know a single society without social inequalities. Social inequality has many faces, it manifests itself in a wide variety of forms and at different levels of social organization. Surveys show: people have a fairly good idea of ​​their place in the social hierarchy, they acutely feel and react painfully to social inequality, which is often expressed in social conflicts.

Thirdly, there is reason to believe that human nature has a genetically inherent desire to dominate other people. This desire is expressed to varying degrees among individuals. A person or a social group, having received power, always tries to use it openly or covertly. These processes can be regulated (representative democracy, separation of powers, rotation of government officials), but cannot be completely eliminated.

Fourthly, society is objectively interested in nominating the most capable and gifted people for management, at the top of power, and thus is forced to create conditions so that people strive and have the desire to occupy these places. Social inequality is a kind of instrument of self-preservation of society, with the help of which it deliberately ensures that the most important positions are filled by capable and qualified people, a kind of elite - political, economic, scientific, military, etc. The mistakes of such people or their incompetence can be very costly to society. Therefore, it is necessary to create some advantages in social status, social position, stimulating the promotion of the most capable people.

Fundamental theoretical basis social inequalities, stratification is the very development of civilization. Each individual person cannot master all the achievements of material and spiritual culture. Specialization of people arises and, along with it, more and less valuable activities. People are equal in their abilities, upbringing and education. This is the objective basis of stratification.

Reasons social inequalities.
Functionalism:

When a certain type of activity or profession is valued more in a society, a hierarchy in society is built depending on the importance of these professions.
People have different abilities, the most talented are engaged in the most prestigious professions, the talented should occupy the top of the social pyramid.
According to Marx:

Social inequality is based on economic inequality.
Those who own property oppress those who do not own it.
According to Weber. At the core social inequalities lie:

Wealth
Power
Prestige
According to Sorokin. Reason social inequalities are:

Own
Power
Profession
Forms social inequalities:
Biosocial
Sexual
Ethnic
National
Gender

And they have unequal life chances and opportunities to meet their needs.

In its most general form, inequality means that people live in conditions in which they have unequal access to limited resources for material and spiritual consumption.

Carrying out qualitatively unequal working conditions, satisfying social needs to varying degrees, people sometimes find themselves engaged in economically heterogeneous labor, because such types of labor have different assessment their social usefulness.

The main mechanisms of social inequality are relations of property, power (dominance and subordination), social (i.e. socially assigned and hierarchized) division of labor, as well as uncontrolled, spontaneous social differentiation. These mechanisms are mainly related to the characteristics market economy, with inevitable competition (including in the labor market) and unemployment. Social inequality is perceived and experienced by many people (primarily the unemployed, economic migrants, those who find themselves at or below the poverty line) as a manifestation of injustice. Social inequality and wealth stratification in society, as a rule, lead to increased social tension, especially during the transition period. This is precisely what is typical for Russia at present.

The main principles of social policy are:

1. the establishment of socialist power with the subsequent transition to communism and the withering away of the state;
2. protecting living standards by introducing different forms compensation for price increases and indexation;
3. providing assistance to the poorest families;
4. issuing assistance in case of unemployment;
5. ensuring social insurance policy, establishing a minimum wage for workers;
6. development of education, health care, environment mainly at the expense of the state;
7. pursuing an active policy aimed at ensuring qualifications.

Literature

• Shkaratan, Ovsey Irmovich. Sociology of inequality. Theory and reality; National research University "Higher School of Economics". - M.: Publishing house. house High school Economics, 2012. - 526 p. - ISBN 978-5-7598-0913-5

Links

• "Ideology of Inequality" Elizaveta Aleksandrova-Zorina

See also

Categories:

• Social inequality
• Social systems
• Economic problems
• Social problems
• Socioeconomics
• Income distribution

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

See what “Social inequality” is in other dictionaries:

For inequalities in the socio-economic sense, see Social inequality. In mathematics, an inequality (≠) is a statement about the relative size or order of two objects, or that they are simply not the same (see also Equality).... ... Wikipedia

SOCIAL EQUALITY- - view social relations, which is characterized by the same rights and freedoms of individuals belonging to different classes, social groups and strata, their equality before the law. Antipode S. r. - social inequality that arose with... ... Encyclopedic Dictionary in psychology and pedagogy

A concept denoting the same social position of people belonging to different social classes and groups. SR idea. as a principle of organizing society in different historical eras was understood differently. Philosophy ancient world,… … The latest philosophical dictionary

English inequality, social; German Ungleichheit, soziale; frlpedašo sociale; A specific form of social differentiation, when cutting individual individuals, social. boundaries, layers, classes are at different levels of vertical social. hierarchies, have unequal... Encyclopedia of Sociology

INEQUALITY, a, cf. 1. Lack of equality (in 1 and 2 meanings), equality. N. sil. Social n. 2. In mathematics: a relationship between quantities, showing that one quantity is greater or less than another. The inequality sign (>... Dictionary Ozhegova

SOCIAL EQUALITY- a concept denoting the same social position of people belonging to different social classes and groups. The idea of ​​S.R. as a principle of organizing society in different historical eras was understood differently. Philosophy of the ancient world... ... Sociology: Encyclopedia

Liberalism ... Wikipedia

A; Wed 1. Lack of equality in anything. Social, economic n. N. sil. N. before the law. N. women. 2. Math. A relationship between numbers or quantities, indicating that one of them is greater or less than the other (indicated by the sign ≠ or ◁, ... ... Encyclopedic Dictionary

inequality- INEQUALITY, a, cf. Social rule, which consists in non-observance of equal rights of people in society, equal status of someone, something, lack of equality; Syn: inequality; Ant.: equality. Economic inequality of regions. Inequality... ... Explanatory dictionary of Russian nouns

inequality- A; Wed 1) Lack of equality in anything. Social, economic inequality. Inequality of power. Inequality before the law. Inequality of women. 2) math. A relationship between numbers or quantities indicating that one of them is greater or less... ... Dictionary of many expressions

Books

• There is social inequality! , Plantel Group. After reading this book, old fairy tales about princes and princesses sound and are perceived differently. After all, it is about economic and social inequality that existed in the past...