When considering the class-stratification theory, which reveals the process of stratification of society into social classes and strata, we see that this stratification is based on the unequal access of people to material goods, power, education, prestige, which contributes to the hierarchical structure of society, i.e. placement of some layers above or below others. Thus, the problem of equality and inequality characterizes the process of stratification.

Social inequality- these are the conditions under which people have unequal access to such social benefits as money, power, prestige, education, etc.

There is no single answer to the question of what causes inequality in sociology. Representatives of philosophical and sociological trends are trying to explain this process from their positions.

Thus, Marxism explains the social inequality existing in society by its economic organization. From the Marxist point of view, inequality is the result of the fact that people who control social values ​​(mainly the means of production, wealth and power) benefit for themselves. Such a situation can give rise to discontent and lead to class struggle. This so-called conflict theory.

Supporters of the theory of functionalism do not agree with the Marxist theory. They consider social inequality as a condition for the existence of society, which makes it possible to encourage the most beneficial species labor and the best representatives of society. Thus, M. Durkheim, in his work “On the Division of Social Labor”, is one of the first to explain inequality by the fact that in all societies some types of activity are considered more important than others. All the functions of society - law, religion, family, work, etc. - form a hierarchy according to how highly they are valued. And people themselves are talented in different ways. In the process of learning, these differences are intensified. In order to attract the best and gifted, society must promote social rewards for their merits.

M. Weber bases his theory of inequality on the concept status groups who enjoy honor and respect and have unequal social prestige.

According to P. Sorokin, the reason social inequality are property, power, profession.

A peculiar approach to explaining social inequality - in reputation theory of L. Warner. He determined the belonging of people to one or another stratum, based on the assessment of their status by other members of society, that is, reputation. Conducting research, he came to the conclusion that people themselves are accustomed to dividing each other into superior and inferior. Thus, the cause of inequality is the psyche of people. (See: Ryazanov, Yu. B. Social inequality / Yu. B. Ryazanov, A. A. Malykhin // Sociology: textbook. - M., 1999. - P. 13).

By stating the fact of social inequality in society and revealing its causes, many sociologists, and not only functionalists, justify it. So, P. Sorokin noted that inequality is not only an objective reality social life but also an important source of social development. Equalization in income, in relation to property, power deprives individuals of an important internal incentive for action, self-realization, self-affirmation, and society - the only energy source of development. But life proves that there are different inequalities, when one works, to put it mildly, has everything and even more, and the other, while working, barely drags out a beggarly existence. Such inequality cannot be easily justified.

Social inequality, stratification and social mobility

TOPIC 4. Social class structure of society

The main groups in the stratification structure of society

Social class structure of society

Subjects , carriers of social relations are social communities and groups. It is the subjects that bind the main spheres into a single societal system. public life Therefore, the analysis of the social structure of society is the central problem of sociology.

In the very general view societal structure -it is a stable connection of such elements of the socio-cultural system as classes, strata and groups, which differ in their place in the system of social inequalities of society.

Therefore, it is first necessary to find out the origins of social inequality and its impact on the social differentiation of people in society.

Social inequality, stratification and social mobility

Social inequality has existed throughout the history of human civilization. Many modern researchers see the origins of social inequality in the natural differences of people in terms of physical data, temperament, and strength of motivation. Initially emerging inequality is usually highly unstable and does not lead to institutional consolidation. For example, a strong, strong-willed, purposeful person can be a leader and subjugate the members of the group, receiving more material benefits, honor until a stronger and more ambitious applicant appears. The authority of the leaders of tribal social structures had to be constantly supported by the successful achievement of group goals.

The next stage in the formation of social inequality is the consolidation of the existing situation in the conditions of social division of labor and exchange. In society, groups are differentiated, unequal by nature of work(workers of mental and physical labor), by social roles(father, doctor, salesman, political figure), by type of settlement and way of life(urban and rural population).

Consolidation of inequality is carried out by institutionalization and regulatory framework, establishing the place of each individual in the social structure. Even natural differences take on a socially institutionalized form. Women are socially unequal to men, younger - older. A stable system of social statuses appears that determines the ranks of individuals according to such criteria as property, access to power, etc.

Causes of social inequality sociologists explain in different ways. Functionalists, starting with E. Durkheim, point to the division of functions according to their significance for a particular society. On the basis of the hierarchy of social functions, a corresponding hierarchy of unequal social groups is formed.

Marxists believe that inequality is not only a consequence of the division of labor, but also of property, the form of property and the way it is owned.

Social exchange theories argue that inequality results from unfair, unequal sharing of outcomes. human activity. M. Weber was the first to substantiate the importance of identifying unequal status groups that differ in social prestige, belonging to certain political circles (parties), and access to power.

Inequality has many faces and manifests itself in various parts of the social system: in the family, at home, at work, in organizations, and large groups. It is a necessary condition for the organization of social life in the types of social systems known to us. Inequality is ordered by social institutions because it gives stability social relations and stimulates the development of the productive forces of society. The reproduction of inequality leads to the stratification of society.

Social stratification -it is a hierarchically organized structure of social inequality that exists in a certain society, in a certain historical period of time.

The hierarchically organized structure of social inequality can be represented as a division of the whole society into strata (this means a layer). The stratification of society into strata can be compared with the geological layers of the soil. At the same time, in comparison with natural stratifications, social implies: rank bundle when the upper layers are in a privileged position in relation to the lower ones; fewer top layers.

A carefully developed theory of stratification was created by our compatriot P.A. Sorokin, who believed that it was impossible to give a single set of criteria for belonging to any stratum and saw three stratification structures in society: economic, professional and political. He used the criteria identified by his predecessors and contemporaries: property, income, profession, power, social roles, and so on.

How did P.A. Sorokin imagine the social stratification of society?

First of all, he distinguished one-dimensional stratification, carried out by selecting groups for any one sign e.g. income. Further, in the course of multidimensional stratification, groups are identified that have a whole set of common characteristics, for example, women of a certain nationality, age, with low incomes.

According to P.A. Sorokin, in the modern world there are millions of sociocultural systems in which microgroups (dyads, triads) and supersystems, world religious associations (a billion Catholics, several billion Muslims) can be distinguished. This set of social systems is classified according to many bases.

Among the one-dimensional groups, there are biosocial: racial, gender, age; sociocultural: clan, territorial neighborhood, linguistic, ethnic groups, states, professional groups, economic groups, religious associations, political organizations, ideological groups (scientific, educational, ethical, recreation and entertainment groups), nominal elite groups (leaders, geniuses, historical figures ).

P.A. Sorokin refers to multilateral (combination of several values) groups: family, clan, tribe, nation, estate and classes.

This scheme is not particularly disputed in sociology, although other theories of stratification have been proposed.

In the works of American sociologists, there are up to 90 signs of stratification. In different periods of history, one or the other foundations of social division come to the fore. The ancient Egyptians spent a huge portion of their national income on serving the dead, including them in their ranking system. Religion has played a prominent role in stratification in Russia for many centuries. Russian schismatics (nobles, merchants, peasants) went into the fire for the right to be baptized in their own way.

According to the views of the American sociologist E. O. Wright, in modern capitalist production there are three types of control over economic resources, which make it possible to single out the main strata.

1. Control over investments or money capital.

2. Control over land and industrial means of production.

3. Control over labor and power.

The capitalist class controls all three types of resources, while the workers control none.

Frank Parkin, a British sociologist, a follower of M. Weber, considers property, control over monetary resources, race, nationality, language, religion - as special social partitions that separate strata. For example, in South Africa, until recently, white unions excluded blacks from membership in order to maintain their privileged position.

The German sociologist R. Dahrendorf proposed as a basis social stratification put the concept of "authority", which, in his opinion, most accurately characterizes the relationship of power and the struggle between groups for a prestigious place in the stratification system. R. Dahrendorf divides modern society into managers and managed. In turn, the former are divided into two subgroups: managing-owners and managing-managers. The managed group is also heterogeneous. It can be divided into skilled and unskilled workers. Between the two main strata is an intermediate "new middle class" - the product of the assimilation of the labor aristocracy and employees.

The most influential point of view on the process of formation of social strata can be considered the theory of stratification by K. Davis and W. Moore - supporters of E. Durkheim's functional approach.

According to this theory, every society must solve the problem of placing and motivating individuals in the social structure in accordance with their functional capabilities. For the distribution of people according to social statuses and their motivation, remuneration is used, which reproduces both income inequality and the statuses themselves. The harder the job, the more vocational training it demands, the higher the status rank and pay. However, there is another group of statuses that are not functionally significant, but, nevertheless, are highly rewarded. These are hard-to-fill statuses, i.e. unprestigious, unhealthy work. Religious activities are also important, so the clergy are rewarded more than ordinary workers. The reward is not always money. It can be more honor, respect, insignia, orders.

Thus, from the point of view of the functionalist theory, inequality and status distribution on the scale of stratification depends, first of all, on the functional significance of this status, the requirements for fulfilling the role (professional qualities) and the difficulties of filling the social status.

Sociology knows four main historical systems of social stratification.

Slavery - the most pronounced form of social inequality, in which some people belong to others as property. As the main, mass system of stratification, slavery disappears in the 19th century, but even today elements of the slave trade persist in some third world countries.

castes associated with the culture of the Indian subcontinent, where they are elaborate and associated with the Hindu religion. Religion and traditions fix belonging to a caste so strongly that Brahmins, for example, generally avoid any contact with untouchables, and those, in turn, are mainly engaged in animal husbandry.

Caste-like systems of stratification arose in other countries when a policy of racial segregation was pursued. For example, in the United States, after the abolition of slavery, the degree of separation of blacks from whites remained so strong that the stratification system was in fact a caste system.

Estates were part of European feudalism and other traditional civilizations. The place of estates in the stratification system was fixed by law, all estates had different rights, duties, clothes, etc. Places in the hierarchy were distributed as follows: aristocracy, nobility, clergy, merchants, free peasants, servants, artists, etc.

Classes differ primarily in economic opportunities, are impersonal, mobile and independent of legal and religious norms.

The strata must not be considered in a frozen, unchanging position, but in constant movements and displacements. These movements in sociology are called "social mobility".

social mobility - this is any transition of an individual, group, social object from one social position to another, from stratum to stratum, or within one layer.(Under the social object, P.A. Sorokin understands property, cultural objects).

Horizontal mobility - this is the movement of an individual (social object) from one group to another, located at the same level (change of residence, family, religion). Status, income, prestige do not change. If such a move occurs up(promotion, increase in income), then there is vertical mobility. Deprivation of status, bankruptcy, loss of respect, deprivation of awards are examples downward vertical mobility.

Due to the fact that the social movements of people and social objects are carried out both individually and jointly, there are individual and group vertical mobility.

According to the figurative expression of P.A. Sorokin, “the first case of decline resembles the fall of a man from a ship; the second is a ship that sank with all on board. The mechanism of infiltration in vertical mobility is associated with the action of the main social channels (elevators). Under them, P.A. Sorokin understands the main social institutions: army, education system, political and economic organizations, marriage and family, property.

For example, an individual chooses a military career because it guarantees a stable, gradual rise from one stratum to another, an increase in income, status, prestige. War can accelerate the movement of this social elevator, since it implies the expulsion due to the death of those who occupy higher ranks, provides an opportunity to show military prowess, receive awards, etc.

In the spirit of the positivist tradition, P.A. Sorokin proposes to distinguish between the absolute and relative intensity of mobility (the number of people moved per unit of time), calculate the total mobility index, etc. His work "Social Mobility" is still considered the official textbook in American universities.

The positivism of P.A. Sorokin is also clearly manifested in the formulation of the main laws of stratification. Here are some examples:

1. Any society is stratified; an unstratified society is a utopia.

2. No individual, no group can permanently maintain the same place in the system of stratification.

3. The narrower the boundaries of stratification, the more likely social stagnation, the cessation of development; the wider the boundaries of stratification, the more likely social explosions and revolutions.

To measure social distances in the social hierarchy, P.A. Sorokin proposed the term "decile coefficient", meaning the difference in income between the richest 10% and the poorest 10%.

Changes in the individual's position in the stratification system can occur not only under the influence of vertical and horizontal mobility, but also as a result of the reorganization of the social structure, the introduction new system stratification. New industries, services, new professions appear or disappear.

Mass movements horizontally and vertically are associated with profound changes in the economic system of society, with a change in ideological guidelines, and the emergence of new social groups.

3. SOCIAL MOBILITY.

4. SOCIAL STRATIFICATION IN MODERN RUSSIA.

"Any organized social group always socially stratified. There has not been and is not a single permanent social group that would be “flat” and in which all members would be equal. Societies without stratification, with the real equality of their members - a myth that never became a reality.

P.A. Sorokin

1. SOCIAL INEQUALITY IN SOCIETY, ITS CAUSES AND SIGNIFICANCE. INSTITUTIONAL MECHANISMS FOR REGULATION OF INEQUALITY.

Social ties connect individuals into certain stable associations, groups that are characterized by different features are differentiated according to various criteria. This can be gender, age, profession, etc. At the same time, we see that both individuals and groups occupy an unequal position in society. Inequality is a characteristic feature of any society. Anthropological research suggests that it already existed in primitive societies and was determined by strength, dexterity, courage, religious awareness, etc.

Sociologists explain the causes of the origin of inequality in different ways. One of the first explanations of inequality in sociology was given by E. Durkheim in his work « On the division of social labor». The author's conclusion is that different types of activity are valued differently in society. Accordingly, they form a certain hierarchy. In addition, people themselves have varying degrees of talent, skill, etc. Society must see to it that the most able and competent perform the most important functions; in turn, this determines various rewards

Marxists (K. Marx, F. Engels) main reason inequality is seen in the uneven distribution of ownership of the means of production. According to the supporters of the functional approach (K. Davis, W. Moore), inequality and status distribution in society are based on the functional significance of this status, its importance for society. According to the theory of social exchange (J. Homans), inequality in society arises in the process of unequal exchange of the results of human activity. Inequality appears as natural way self-regulation and survival of society, its organization, as an incentive to promote

Many modern researchers see the origins of social inequality in the natural differences of people in physical data, personal qualities, internal energy, as well as in the strength of motivation aimed at satisfying the most significant, urgent needs. The initial differences of people in terms of physical data and personal qualities lead to the fact that the most powerful, energetic, purposeful and highly motivated individuals gain an advantage in the course of the exchange of social values. These advantages enable such individuals to make asymmetrical, unequal exchanges. In the course of constantly occurring mutually intersecting asymmetric exchanges, the formation of a normative basis for inequality begins. Regulatory Frameworkis a set of specific norms that fix the behavior of an individual in accordance with their rank. Pinning and creation begins legislative framework for the elevation of certain social groups in society.

The next stage in the formation of inequality relations is the consolidation of the existing situation, which develops at some point in the course of the exchange. This consolidation is carried out by creating a regulatory framework that establishes the rank place (or status) of each individual or social group in the social structure, provided that he has the necessary number of values ​​at his disposal. The nature of the existing values ​​forms the type of structure in relation to which the status of an individual or group is determined. For example, the rank of an individual in the property structure (or relation to the means of production) or the normative job structure, etc., may matter.

The most common way to measure inequality is to compare the highest and lowest incomes. This phenomenon is called scale of inequality. Currently, the so-called decile coefficient(the ratio of average incomes of 10% of the least wealthy and 10% of the most wealthy segments of the population). Another way is to analyze the share of family income spent on food (the rich pay 5-7% of their income for food).

If inequality characterizes the entire society as a whole, then poverty concerns only part of the population. The scale of poverty sociologists name the proportion of the country's population living near the official line, or poverty threshold. Threshold (line) of poverty- is the amount of money officially established as the minimum income, thanks to which an individual or family is able to purchase food, clothing and housing. It is also called the poverty rate. The poverty line is set at the level of the minimum consumer basket. In our country, the concept is also used living wage.

In 2007, the living wage in Russia was 3,809 rubles in total. The consumer basket looked as follows: 1506 rubles - food; 643 rubles - non-food products; 1410 rubles - services.

In sociology there are absolute and relative poverty.

Under absolute poverty is understood as such a state in which an individual is not able to satisfy even the basic needs for food, housing, clothing, warmth, or is able to satisfy only minimum requirements for biological survival. The numerical criterion is the poverty threshold.

Under relative poverty is understood as the inability to maintain a decent standard of living, or some standard accepted in society. Relative poverty refers to how poor you are compared to other people. The lower limit of relative poverty is the subsistence minimum, or the poverty threshold, and the upper limit is the level decent standard of living(this is the amount of material wealth that allows a person to lead a fairly comfortable standard of living, not to feel disadvantaged, to lead a decent lifestyle, to satisfy all reasonable needs).

In social statistics, such living standards indicators :

size and form of income;

consumption structure;

quality and availability of housing;

working and rest conditions;

state of the environment;

educational and cultural level of consumption;

health and longevity.

In 2004, the World Bank's Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Department prepared a special report assessing the state of poverty in Russia. According to the methodology of the World Bank, a person who has a thousand rubles a month and can spend no more than 3.5 dollars a day can be considered poor in Russia. This is every fifth inhabitant of the country. Bank analysts are amazed that most of Russia's poor are working families, adults with secondary and vocational education, and families with children. According to the World Bank, with a 10% drop in incomes of citizens on a national scale, the number of poor people increases immediately by 50%.

Russian poverty is extremely sensitive to any shocks - the poor get richer faster in case of prosperity and get poorer in a crisis situation. The most typical factors that determine the risk of being in one or another group of the poor include: loss of health, low level of qualification, displacement from the labor market, high family “burden” (large families, single-parent families, etc.), individual characteristics associated with the image life, value orientations (unwillingness to work, bad habits).

Currently sociological research conducted by various scientific teams, think tanks give a mixed picture of the extent of poverty in Russia. Moreover, estimates of the proportion of the poor in the population range from 50 to 80%. This is explained by the fact that different sociological groups rely on different theoretical and methodological bases. According to official statistics (Rosstat data), in 2007 the number of people living below the poverty line was 22.3 million people (15.8% of the population).

Deprivation. Deprivation should be understood as any condition that creates or can create in an individual or group a feeling of being disadvantaged in comparison with other individuals (or groups), or with an internalized set of standards. The feeling of deprivation can be conscious or unconscious.

Five types of deprivation can be distinguished.

Economic deprivation arises from the uneven distribution of income in society and the limited satisfaction of the needs of some individuals and groups.

social deprivation due to the tendency of society to evaluate the qualities and abilities of some individuals and groups higher than others, expressing this assessment in the distribution of such social rewards as prestige, power, high status in society and the corresponding participation in social life.

Organismicdeprivation associated with congenital or acquired individual human shortcomings - physical deformities, disability, dementia, etc.

ethical deprivation associated with a value conflict that arises when the ideals of society do not coincide with the ideals of individuals or groups.

mentaldeprivation arises as a result of the formation of a value vacuum in an individual or group - the absence of a significant system of values, in accordance with which they could build their lives.

Information for thought

Life expectancy at the turn of the century

(according to the UN)

Men Women

Japan 77 83

Australia 76 81

Sweden 76 81

Greece 76 81

Spain 75 82

Norway 75 80

Holland 75 81

UK 75 80

Germany 73 80

Armenia 71 78

Argentina 70 77

Turkey 67 72

Egypt 65 68

Belarus 62.7 74.4

Russia 59 72

Kazakhstan 59 70

(Source: Russian Federation Today magazine, No. 13, 2001)

Average monthly earnings

US $3000

UK $2700

Germany 1700 dollars

Poland $459

Hungary $396

Czech Republic $394

Lithuania 280 dollars

China 200 dollars

Russia 90 dollars

Uzbekistan 49 dollars

Azerbaijan 46 dollars

Ukraine 39 dollars

Armenia 37 dollars

Moldova 33 dollars

Kyrgyzstan 22 dollars

Tajikistan $8.9

(Source: Russian Federation Today magazine, No. 10, 2001)

2. ESSENCE OF SOCIAL STRATIFICATION, ITS MAIN DIMENSIONS.

Modern society is characterized by the presence of groups that have much greater resources of wealth and power, rights and obligations, privileges and prestige than other groups. In such a hierarchically ordered way of distributing socially significant goods and their symbols, the essence of social stratification is expressed, with the help of which society ensures its integration, encouraging some types of social activity and suppressing others. An analysis of the vertical stratification of society is reflected in theories of stratification. The very notion of stratification"came to sociology from geology, where" stratum" means a geological formation. 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 dimension of inequality.

The basis of the stratification division is the inequality between people, their division according to income, the prestige of their activities, and political status. Everyone has their own place in the social hierarchy, and hence the uneven distribution of rights and privileges, responsibilities and duties, power and influence.

Thus, society has a multi-level structure, it is divided into social strata (or strata), which are arranged hierarchically. One of the authors of the theory of social stratification Pitirim Aleksandrovich Sorokin believed that stratification in society can be three types: economic, political and professional. This means that we must divide society according to criteria of income (and wealth), according to criteria for influencing the behavior of members of society, and finally, according to criteria related to successful performance. social roles, the presence of knowledge, skills and intuition, which is evaluated and rewarded by members of society.

In the works of P. Sorokin, several fundamental signs of the stratification of society into strata are distinguished:

economic (poor - rich);

professional (prestigious - non-prestigious work);

political (ruling - controlled);

personal (various abilities and qualities of people).

Sorokin's point of view was successfully developed by his student, a prominent representative of functionalism Talcott Parsons, who believes that the value orientations of members of society are the basis of stratification. At the same time, the assessment and 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, possibilities of spiritual and ideological influence on other strata of society, etc.).

At present, the theory of stratification can be considered the most influential point of view on the formation of social strata. K. Davis and W. Moore. From their point of view, inequality and status distribution in society are based on the functional significance of a given status, the requirements for fulfilling a role, and the difficulty of filling a social status that is functionally significant for society.

Modern theories of social classes are also based on the theory of stratification. Most sociologists see a basic difference in relation to property, however, they recognize such factors as official status, power, prestige, etc. as class-forming. If a social stratum can denote a division along one parameter, then a number of class-forming parameters serve as the basis for a class, and the possession (ability to dispose) of resources is the basis of the class division of society. Moreover, each class has different social opportunities and privileges, which is decisive condition upon reaching the most prestigious and rewarded statuses.

So, social stratification can be defined as a structured system of social inequality, in which individuals and social groups are ranked according to their social status in society.

In modern sociology, the following are distinguished main criteria of social stratification:

income - the number of cash receipts for a certain period (month, year);

wealth – accumulated income (movable and immovable property);

power ;

education ;

prestige - public assessment of the significance of a particular activity, profession, status.

In modern sociology, there are many models of social stratification. Sociologists primarily distinguish three main classes: higher, average and lower. Sometimes they are also subdivided into levels inside. Thus, the American sociologist At. L. Warner in his study « City- yankees» (Yankee City) singled out 6 classes: 1) the highest upper class (the richest, noble origin), 2) the highest lower class(rich, but not from the aristocracy), 3) upper middle class (wealthy intelligentsia), 4) lower middle class ("white collar"), 5) upper lower class (workers), b) lower lower class (lumpen, etc.).

The upper class includes those who occupy the most high positions according to the criteria of power, wealth, education, prestige. These are influential politicians and public figures, big businessmen, bankers, managers of leading firms, the military elite, prominent representatives of the scientific and creative intelligentsia. The upper class usually makes up a small percentage of the population (no more than 10%). Its role in the life of society is ambiguous. On the one hand, he has powerful means of influencing political power. On the other hand, its interests, the main of which are the preservation and increase of accumulated property, constantly clash with the interests of the rest of society. While not possessing sufficient numbers, the upper class is not a guarantor of the sustainability and stability of society.

The middle class includes small and medium-sized entrepreneurs, managers, civil servants, military personnel, doctors, lawyers, teachers, engineers and technicians, highly skilled workers, farmers and some other categories. The middle class is characterized by economic independence and activity. It (primarily the entrepreneurial stratum) provides employment for the population and a large part of the national income. As a subject of politics, the middle class stands for a firm rule of law, legality, observance of human rights, as well as for stable, stable power. He is an opponent of anarchy, arbitrariness and extremism in politics, a supporter of moderate, balanced, thoughtful reforms. Acting as an opponent of big capital and holding back the radical aspirations of the lower class, on the whole, the middle class plays the role of a stabilizer of society, maintaining its balance and stability. The fact that the middle class is the basis of the stability of society, said even Aristotle. Assessing the middle class, the English historian A. Toynbee emphasized that modern western civilization is, first of all, a middle-class civilization, and Western society became modern only after it succeeded in creating a large and competent middle class. And vice versa, where different reasons the middle class has not taken shape, there is socio-economic and political instability, the process of modernizing society is significantly hindered, etc.

It is possible to identify the main signs of belonging to the middle class:

the presence of property in the form of accumulated property or existing as a source of income (medium and small enterprises, shops, workshops, etc.);

a high level of education (as a rule, higher or specialized secondary), which can be characterized as intellectual property;

income that fluctuates around the national average;

a professional activity that has a fairly high prestige in society.

At the bottom of the social ladder is the lower class. It is made up of people with low incomes and mainly engaged in unskilled labor, as well as various declassed elements (beggars, homeless, vagrants, etc.). The very position of these layers determines their position as unstable. Usually it is these strata that become the social base of radical and extremist parties.

Graphically, the social stratification of a modern developed democratic society will look like a rhombus:

top class

middle class

lower class

As can be seen, the widest stabilizing part of the rhombus, the "buffer" between the upper and lower classes, is occupied by the middle class, whose share is on average 60-80%.

The social stratification of a developing society will have a different profile. This is a pyramid, where the lower part from the base represents the lower class, which makes up the majority of the population, and top part represented by the upper and middle classes, which together constitute a minority (less than 30%) of the population.

It must be borne in mind that the height and profile of the stratification may vary, but not indefinitely. Alignment, movement towards the plane of stratification leads to the destruction of the economy, anarchy and chaos.

Its unlimited increase is also fraught with catastrophic consequences. As noted by P.A. Sorokin, “there is a “saturation” point beyond which society cannot move without risk. major disaster. When it is reached, the social building collapses, and its upper layers are overthrown. 6

The formation and maintenance of social stratification is not an absolutely self-regulating and natural process. Power has a significant influence on him. Depending on its nature, certain adjustments can be made to the construction of a system for ranking social positions. This is essentially one of the aspects of social control exercised in society by power structures.

Stratification types. For the stratification of the population in different historical eras and in different societies, various principles and types of strata were used. Traditionally, four types of stratification systems are distinguished: slavery, castes, estates, classes. However, in any society there is a combination of different stratification systems and many transitional forms. In modern sociology, there are nine types stratification systems that can be used to describe any social organism: physical-genetic, slave-owning, caste, estate, class, etakratic, socio-professional, cultural-symbolic, cultural-normative.

Physico-genetic the stratification system is based on the differentiation of individuals and social groups according to natural socio-demographic characteristics (gender, age, physical data - beauty, strength, dexterity). This "natural" stratification system dominated in primitive society, but continues to be played to this day.

Slavery - an economic, social and legal form of enslavement of people, bordering on complete lack of rights and an extreme degree of inequality. Slavery is historically the first system of social stratification. It existed in the countries of the Ancient World (Egypt, Babylon, Greece, Rome). In some countries (USA, Latin American countries) slavery existed until the 19th century.

caste system - a stratification system that involves a life-long assignment of a person to a certain stratum, depending on his origin. The caste was a closed group. It is not possible to move from one caste to another. The caste system was most widespread in India.

class system - a stratification system that involves the legal assignment of a person to a certain stratum. The rights and obligations of each class were determined by law and consecrated by religion. The belonging to the class was mainly inherited. But at the same time, in exceptional cases, marriages between estates or a transition from one estate to another were possible. Estates were divided into privileged (nobles, clergy) and unprivileged (merchants, artisans, peasants).

class system - an open-type stratification system that does not imply a legal or any other way of assigning an individual to a particular stratum. Belonging to classes is determined, first of all, by the ownership of property, the level of income received. The class system is characteristic of modern industrial society. There are opportunities to move from one stratum to another.

Etacratic the stratification system is characterized by the fact that the differentiation of social groups is based on their position in the power-state hierarchies. In ancient times, the etacratic system was observed in Asian despotic states. In the twentieth century, it was inherent in "socialist societies".

Socio-professional the stratification system is based on the division of social groups depending on the content and working conditions, occupation. Of particular importance are the qualification requirements - the possession of experience, skills and abilities. Approval and maintenance of the hierarchical order is ensured by means of certificates (diplomas, licenses, patents, etc.), which fix the level of qualification and ability to perform certain types activities. They are not inherited.

Cultural and symbolic the stratification system is based on the difference in access to socially significant information, unequal opportunities to filter and interpret this information, the ability to be a bearer of sacred (scientific, mystical) knowledge. Inequality is based on specific capital - symbolic, which allows manipulating society.

Cultural-normative stratification system. Differentiation is built on differences in the way of life and norms of behavior of individuals and social groups. Here the groups are ranked into "noble - ignoble", "elite - ordinary people - bottom", etc. The way of life, the behavior of social groups occupying high social positions often turn into normative guidelines and begin to play the role of moral regulation.

2006 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS STATEEDUCATIONALSTANDARDON ... disciplines. 2. Regulatory references Stateeducationalstandard higher professional education. Direction of specialist training on... and sociology" scale...

Determining the criteria for inequality and social stratification is one of the most important methodological problems in the theory of stratification. Even before the emergence of sociology, attempts were made to describe the structure of society on the basis of the position of various groups in relation to the state, power, authority, access to the distribution of life's goods, etc. The first deep and systematic substantiation of the criteria of social inequality was given by K. Marx, whose name is firmly associated with the concepts of "class" and "class approach" in modern sociology and social knowledge.

K. Marx considered the basis and main criterion for social inequality and social stratification to be the division of labor, which determines the unequal position of individuals in social production, the difference in the roles they perform and the size of the share of social wealth they receive. In the process of the development of society, there was a professional specialization, a division into skilled and unskilled, performing and managerial, physical and mental labor. With the emergence of private property, the division into those who possess it, and those who are deprived of it and are in different forms dependence on owners. Thus, in a slave-owning society, the slaves themselves are the property of the slave-owners; in a feudal society, where the main factor of production is land, there is a division into land owners (feudal lords) and dependent peasants who are forced to pay rent for the use of land. In bourgeois society, K. Marx contrasted the class of owner-capitalists with hired workers who were deprived of their property and therefore forced to sell their labor. Specific historical classes depend on the mode of production underlying the social system.

Due to the common position in the system of social production, classes, according to K. Marx, have common economic interests, from which the common political interests, etc. follow. At the same time, the interests of classes whose positions are opposite (owners and those who are deprived of property) also have opposite interests. K. Marx and his followers called such classes antagonistic, i.e. irreconcilable. Therefore, classes are characterized by conflict relations with each other, and the struggle between classes is considered by Marxists as the main driving force social development. However, the classes are not always and far from immediately aware of their interests. A class in its infancy, which has not yet realized the objective community of interests that stems not from specific local circumstances, but from the unity of position in the economic mode of production, is called class-in-itself. After the class develops a single "class consciousness" and there is an awareness of objective interests, they take shape in an ideology, political position and political organization, he becomes classes-for-itself.

Many followers, as well as opponents, who recognized the great heuristic value of K. Marx's theory of classes, criticized him for the lack of clear definitions, and tried to give their own interpretations of the class. The definition given by V. I. Lenin in the work "The Great Initiative" (1918): "Classes are called large groups of people, differing in their place in a historically defined system of social production, in their relation ( for the most part fixed and formalized in laws) to the means of production, according to their role in the social organization of labor, and, consequently, according to the methods of obtaining and the size of the share of social wealth that they dispose of. Classes are such groups of people from which another can appropriate labor due to the difference in their place in a certain way of social economy.

The class theory of social stratification proposed by K. Marx can be applied to any society in which there is a developed division of labor and private property. It does not deny other types of stratification, such as class stratification, but shifts the focus of research interest to the analysis of ownership relations for the means of production, explaining all other forms of inequality as secondary. At the same time, the class theory in Marx's interpretation considers the whole diversity of social groups and their relations through the prism of ownership of the means of production. Then social groups whose status is not directly deducible from such relations (clergy, intelligentsia, bureaucracy, military, etc.) have to be considered as "secondary" in relation to the "main" classes: for example, the intelligentsia as a "stratum" in the bourgeois society, etc. Such an approach leads to a schematization, a certain simplification of the real social structure, and forces us to assume that as one mode of production develops or another, the main classes crystallize: in a capitalist society, small independent producers, artisans either go bankrupt and join the ranks of the proletariat, or grow rich and become bourgeois.

M. Weber substantiated the theory of stratification based on the pluralism of criteria. M. Weber classifies the bases of stratification as follows.

• 1. Inequality in the distribution of economic benefits and the realization of economic interests, which determines the division of society into classes. Under classes, he, unlike K. Marx, understands the multitude of people united by the common "chance" of obtaining a surplus product in the market of goods and services, as well as life experience and the ability to "dispose of goods or qualifications in order to generate income within the framework of this economic order". The most important factor in the emergence of" chances "in a market economy is property - as we see, in this M. Weber agrees with K. Marx. Property determines the ability to engage in entrepreneurial activity and compete successfully for the appropriation of the surplus product. Those who are dispossessed (slaves, serfs, hired workers different kind) are divided into classes depending on their qualifications and ability to provide certain services on the market. Members of a class have many and varied interests based on their "opportunities" within a given economic order, but they are not necessarily expressed in a single "class interest" that determines the joint actions of individuals belonging to the class. On the contrary, the interests determined by the "chance" in the market, more often lead, according to M. Weber, to joint actions of representatives of different classes to achieve their goals, for example, entrepreneurs and employees in a capitalist enterprise must negotiate among themselves to achieve their economic goals. The main contradictions that arise in relations between classes, according to M. Weber, are determined by the inequality of opportunities to realize their own "chances" in the market, for example, in the formation of an acceptable price work force, providing access to loans, etc., and not in the fundamental issue of the presence or absence of property. Thus, the class, according to M. Weber, reflects economic stratification, which is not the only one, and is supplemented by other forms.
• 2. Correction of class situations by relations of "status groups", or strata, which are based on the inequality of prestige, "honors" granted by society to one or another group, which M. Weber also calls "social evaluation". The German sociologist emphasizes that class and status do not necessarily coincide, the richest do not necessarily enjoy the greatest prestige. It often turns out that the same status group includes both the haves and the have-nots. M. Weber calls the main content of "honor" the common style of life of those who belong to the same status group, for example, gentlemen who attend the same club. This commonality is the boundary of the status group, which is expressed in the rejection of relations with representatives of other groups, for example, from marriage. Social markers of belonging to a status group can be the privileges of using certain objects, goods, performing any actions: wearing costumes and jewelry, drinking "special" foods and drinks, entertainment, arts, etc. Thus, status groups are associated with the isolation of various social circles, with the allocation of "prestigious" and "non-prestigious". M. Weber notes that in his contemporary society, the "disqualified" groups include those associated with physical labor in one form or another, especially heavy and dirty.

"Social status" M. Weber calls "real claims to positive or negative privileges in relation to social prestige, if it is based on one or more the following criteria: a) lifestyle; b) formal education, which consists in practical or theoretical training and the assimilation of an appropriate way of life; c) the prestige of birth and profession.

Thus, M. Weber practically identifies the concept of social status with belonging to a stratum and distinguishes it from class belonging as an expression of economic chances and interests. Strat and class are not identical to each other, although they are interconnected by many different dependencies. So, in itself, the presence of ownership or a managerial position does not guarantee high status, although it may contribute to its acquisition. There are hereditary statuses determined by the inheritance of privileges and prestige.

3. Unequal distribution of power, leading to the division into "political parties" ". The party unites people of similar convictions, which are not necessarily determined by class and status, and they are not necessarily focused on the realization of the interests of certain classes or strata. However, parties arise only in societies (communities) that have a rational organization of power, and reflect the struggle for power within the community.

M. Weber's three-dimensional model of social stratification underlies modern approaches that involve taking into account the many bases and criteria for dividing society into classes.

Another classical theory of stratification is the theory P. A. Sorokina, who was a consistent critic of the one-dimensional theory of K. Marx.

P. A. Sorokin identified three main forms of stratification:

• 1) economic, consisting in the uneven distribution of material wealth;
• 2) political, due to the uneven distribution of power;
• 3) professional, based on unequal value different professions for society and on the inequality of their prestige and the amount of remuneration they receive.

All three forms of stratification have relative autonomy: political leader is not necessarily the owner of huge capital, and a large entrepreneur, the owner of a multi-million dollar fortune, is not necessarily directly involved in political life and occupies high positions. However, all three forms of stratification are interconnected with each other: representatives of the highest political circles, as a rule, are highly qualified and have a prestigious profession and have a considerable fortune, and representatives of big business, one way or another, also have political influence. And vice versa: the poor, as a rule, have non-prestigious professions and do not occupy high positions in the political sphere.

P. A. Sorokin argued with K. Marx and his followers, insisting on the universality of social stratification, which he considered an inevitable and necessary attribute of social life. Every social group is stratified in one form or another. None of the attempts to destroy economic, political or professional stratification has ever been successful in human history.

P. A. Sorokin’s concept of multidimensional stratification is also associated with the concept of “social space” introduced by him, which in principle differs from geometric or geographical space. Master and slave may be physically close, but the social distance between them will be huge. Movement in geographic space does not always lead to a change in social position, and vice versa, a change in social position does not always lead to movement in geographic space.

The development of sociological theories of social stratification in the 20th century. went in the direction of complicating the system of criteria that make it possible to describe the social structure of society more accurately and in detail.

Factors of social inequality

Factors of social inequality may intersect with its causes. This is due to the fact that both of these concepts ("factors" and "causes") reveal the essence of why and under the influence of what aspects a particular social phenomenon has arisen.

Remark 1

Most of Representatives of sociological thought (for example, Herbert Spencer, Emile Durkheim, Karl Marx and Pitirim Sorokin) call the social division of labor the main factor in the emergence of social inequality. But each of them explains the essence of this factor in its own way.

For example, Herbert Spencer emphasizes that conquest should be singled out as the most key factor in social inequality. On the one hand, the victors and invaders form the ruling class, and on the other hand, the defeated are obliged to obey it. The prisoners of war subsequently become slaves, serfs and become more dependent on the upper stratum of the population.

Another idea that has big influence on the development of a sociology of inequality is the idea of ​​evolution and natural selection. One of the directions of evolutionism within the 19-20 centuries was social Darwinism. He explains social inequality by the fact that between different human societies there is the same struggle for existence and survival as between biological organisms. For example, L. Gumplovich claims that always and at any time social processes and movements will occur under the influence of economic motives. States arise as a result of military clashes between races, the winners become the elite, and the losers are just a mass. Nevertheless, such a stratification, which is based on racial and ethnic differences, is nevertheless built precisely on the division of labor with a predominance of the economic aspect.

There is another opinion that concerns the main factors of social inequality. Thus, supporters of structural functionalism (founder Emile Durkheim) identified two main factors:

1. Hierarchy of activities in society;
2. The degree of talent of individuals.

Remark 2

Thus, social inequality is a necessary feature of any society. It ensures that the most important social positions are occupied by the most competent and trained specialists, respectively, they occupy the top position in the social hierarchy.

Importance of inequality factors

To summarize all of the above, it is worth noting the following: inequality, which is caused by natural differences between people, as the division of labor and other economic processes gradually becomes feature all human societies. The structural-functional tradition recognizes that social inequality is a fundamental and mandatory principle of the organization of society, which reflects the functions of each individual social stratum, group or individual.

The Marxist approach considers inequality as a typical feature of societies at different stages of development. However, after a certain time, this approach proved to be inconsistent, since in practice a social experiment in our country formed a secret inequality. The structure of social inequality in each individual society is influenced not only by internal factors (interactions between all members of society, their specificity, etc.), but also by global trends that come from outside. This is especially noticeable in the period of post-industrial society, when the whole world and all communities are in a state of globalization and internationalization.

Signs of social inequality

Social stratification has its own specific features.

First, these are the so-called qualitative characteristics of social inequality. These signs are inherent in each person, and each one has an individual character, since they are innate. These include the following:

1. Ethnicity;
2. Gender specifics;
3. Age features;
4. Family origin (family ties);
5. Intellectual personality traits;
6. Psychophysiological characteristics of a person.

Secondly, these are socially differentiating signs. They are related to the fulfillment of the prescribed role of the individual. Most often, they include different types of professional and labor activity. This sign is inextricably linked with the first (qualitative characteristics of the personality), because the degree of his perception of other social norms will depend on how developed a person is in himself. So, for example, a person with physical limitations (disabled person) cannot work in an enterprise that involves high physical exertion.

Thirdly, these are signs of possession. This does not include the income of the individual, but the possession of property, material and spiritual values, privileges and goods that may not be available to everyone.

Remark 3

Pitirim Sorokin singled out his hierarchy of signs of social inequality:

1. Economic - the main differentiating factor is wealth. Many authors separate wealth from income, since income is what a person receives for his activities and labor, and has the right to spend almost immediately. Wealth, on the other hand, is all accumulations that are, to a certain extent, inviolable;
2. Political - the presence of power. A person who has influence over others, can impose (in various forms - soft or authoritarian) his opinion, his views and worldview - he has power. The higher the degree of influence, the more power in his hands. The people over whom he has power already automatically belong to the lower strata and social classes;
3. Professional - the differentiating factor is the level of prestige of the received profession. AT modern society technical specialties are most in demand, but training in them is much more difficult than in the humanities. Nevertheless, wages also depend on demand, and income depends on wages, which brings us back to the economic sign of social inequality.