SUBJECT CODE: CORE 016

SUBJECT TITLE: Understanding Culture, Society and Politics

LESSON OBJECTIVES: You must be able to examine the concept, characteristics and
forms of stratification systems using sociological perspectives.

CONTENT/CORE CONTENT:
1. Major Types of Stratification
2. Characteristics of Stratification
3. Social Mobility and Its Types
4. Gender and Sex
5. Wealth Power and Prestige
6. Marxist and Non-Marxist (Weberian Approach of Stratification)

Stratification refers to a process by which individuals and groups are ranked in a more
or less enduring hierarchy of status. It refers to the division of a population into strata,
one on the top of another, on the basis of certain characteristics like inborn qualities,
material possessions and performance.

Social Stratification: Meaning, Types, and Characteristics

In all societies people differ from each other on the basis of their age, sex and personal
characteristics. Human society is not homogeneous but heterogeneous. Apart from the
natural differences, human beings are also differentiated according to socially approved
criteria.

So socially differentiated men are treated as socially unequal from the point of view of
enjoyment of social rewards like status, power, income etc. That may be called social
inequality. The term social inequality simply refers to the existence of socially created
inequalities.
Social stratification is a particular form of social inequality. All societies arrange their
members in terms of superiority, inferiority and equality. Stratification is a process of
interaction or differentiation whereby some people come to rank higher than others.

When individuals and groups are ranked, according to some commonly accepted basis
of valuation in a hierarchy of status levels based upon the inequality of social positions,
social stratification occurs. Social stratification means division of society into different
strata or layers. It involves a hierarchy of social groups. Members of a particular layer
have a common identity. They have a similar life style.

The Indian Caste system provides an example of stratification system. The society in
which divisions of social classes exist is known as a stratified society. Modern
stratification fundamentally differs from stratification of primitive societies. Social
stratification involves the differentiation of individuals or groups on the basis of
possession of certain characteristics whereby some individuals or groups come to rank
higher than others.

Sociologists are concerned not merely with the facts of social differences but also with
their social evaluation.

Stratification defined according to:

1. Ogburn and Nimkoff: It is the process by which individuals and groups are ranked in
more or less enduring hierarchy of status.
2. Lundberg: A stratified society is one marked by inequality, by differences among
people that are evaluated by them as being “lower” and “higher.”
3. Gisbert: “Social stratification is the division of society into permanent groups of
categories linked with each other by the relationship of superiority and
subordinations.”
4. Williams: Social Stratification refers to “the ranking of individuals on a scale of
superiority-inferiority-equality, according to some commonly accepted basis of
valuation.
5. Raymond W. Murray: Social stratification is horizontal division of society into
“higher” and “lower” social units.”
6. Melvin M. Tumin: “Social stratification refers to the arrangement of any social group
or society into hierarchy of positions that are unequal with regard to power, property,
social evaluation and psychic gratification”.

Origin of Stratification:

 According to Davis, social stratification has come into being due to the functional
necessity of the social system.
 Professor Sorokin attributed social stratification mainly to inherited difference in
environmental conditions.
 According to Karl Marx, social factors are responsible for the emergence of different
social strata, i.e. social stratification.
 Gumplowioz and others contended that the origin of social stratification is to be
found in the conquest of one group by another.
 According to Spengler, social stratification is founded upon scarcity which is created
whenever society differentiates positive in terms of functions and powers.
 Racial differences accompanied by dissimilarity also lead to stratification.

Types of Social Stratification:

Social stratification is based upon a variety of principles.

The major types of stratification are:

1. Caste System – which is a hereditary endogamous social group in which a person’s

rank and its accompanying rights and obligations are ascribed on the basis of his birth
into a particular group. For example-Brahmins, Kshyatryas, Vaishyas and Sudra
Caste.

A caste system is extremely elaborate and varies in its structure from area to area so
much so that it does not really constitute one ‘system’ at all, but a loosely connected
diversity of varying beliefs and cultural practices, though certain principles are shared
by all the castes. This form of stratification as we shall see later on, has assumed
wider structural and cultural dimensions.

2. Class - stratification on the basis of class is dominant in modern society. In this, a

person’s position depends to a very great extent upon achievement and his ability to
use to advantage the inborn characteristics and wealth that he may possess.

Classes are not established by legal or religious provisions. Nor membership to class
is based on inherited position as specified either legally or by custom. Class systems
are typically more fluid than the other types of stratification and the boundaries
between classes are never clear-cut.

There are no formal restrictions on inter-marriage between people from different

classes. Some of the characteristics of class include individual’s achievement, social
mobility, economic status and class consciousness.

Thus, class is a large-scale grouping of people who share common economic

resources, which strongly influence the types of lifestyle they are able to lead.
Ownership of wealth, together with occupation, is the chief basis of class differences.

The major classes that exist are: upper class, middle class, and working class.

3. Estates – are the feudal clusters with varying obligations and rights towards each
other. Estates have developed both in Europe, United States and Asia. In our country
jagirdars and jamindars were the traditional estate holders.

With the abolition of jamindari and jagirdari systems these groups of people do not
legally exist. However, the former estate holders in rural society even today hold much
power. They are big peasants and occupy positions of power in PRIs and legislatures.
At operational level they constitute a considerable rank in both rural and urban
stratification.
 Estate system of medieval Europe provides another system of stratification which
gave much emphasis to birth as well as to wealth and possessions. Each estate had a
state.

4. Slavery - had economic basis. In slavery, every slave had his master to whom he was
subjected. The master’s power over the slave was unlimited.

Slavery is an extreme form of inequality in which some individuals are literally owned
by others as their property. The legal conditions of slave ownership have varied
considerably in different societies. There are different variants of slavery. Bonded
labour is one such form of slavery in India. In all parts of world slavery, as a form of
stratification has become extinct.

LESSON PROPER

Now, let us proceed with our lesson focusing on the characteristics of stratification.

On the basis of the analysis of the different definitions given by eminent scholars, social
stratification may have the following characteristics.

1. Social stratification is universal:

There is no society in this world which is free from stratification. Modern stratification
differs from stratification of primitive societies. It is a worldwide phenomenon.
According to Sorokin “all permanently organized groups are stratified.”

2. Stratification is social:
It is true that biological qualities do not determine one’s superiority and inferiority.
Factors like age, sex, intelligence as well as strength often contribute as the basis on
which statues are distinguished. But one’s education, property, power, experience,
character, personality etc. are found to be more important than biological qualities.
Hence, stratification is social by nature.

3. It is ancient:
Stratification system is very old. It was present even in the small wondering bonds. In
almost all the ancient civilizations, the differences between the rich and poor, humble
and powerful existed. During the period of Plato and Kautilya even emphasis was
given to political, social and economic inequalities.

4. It is in diverse forms:
The forms of stratification are not uniform in all the societies. In the modern world
class, caste and estate are the general forms of stratification. In India a special type of
stratification in the form of caste is found. The ancient Aryas were divided into four
varnas: the Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Sudras. The ancient Greeks were
divided into freemen and slaves and the ancient Romans were divided into the
particians and the plebians. So every society, past or present, big or small is
characterized by diverse forms of social stratification.

5. Social stratification is consequential:

 Social stratification has two important consequences one is “life chances” and the
other one is “life style.” A class system not only affects the “life- chances” of the
individuals but also their “life style.”

The members of a class have similar social chances but the social chances vary in
every society. It includes chances of survival and of good physical and mental health,
opportunities for education, chances of obtaining justice, marital conflict, separation
and divorce etc.

Life style denotes a style of life which is distinctive of a particular social status. Life-
styles include such matters like the residential areas in every community which have
gradations of prestige-ranking, mode of housing, means of recreation, the kinds of
dress, kinds of books, TV shows to which one is exposed and so on. Life-style may be
viewed as a sub-culture in which one stratum differs from another within the frame
work of a commonly shared over-all culture.

Social Stratification and Social Mobility:

Social mobility refers to the movement within the social structure, from one social
position to another. It means a change in social status. All societies provide some
opportunity for social mobility. But the societies differ from each other to extent in which
individuals can move from one class or status level to another.

It is said that the greater the amount of social mobility, the more open the class structure.
The concept of social mobility has fundamental importance in ascertaining the relative
“openness” of a social structure. The nature, forms, direction and magnitude of social
mobility depends on the nature and types of social stratification. Sociologists study social
mobility in order to find out the relative ‘openness’ of a social structure.

Any group that improves its standard will also improve its social status. But the rate of
social mobility is not uniform in all the countries. It differs from society to society from
time to time. In India the rate of mobility is naturally low because of agriculture being the
predominant occupation and the continuity of caste system as compared to the other
countries of the world.

Social mobility:

1. Types may be the movement occurring in three directions:

 From lower to higher
 From higher to lower
 Between two positions at the same level.

2. May also be of two types:

a. Vertical mobility – refers to the movement of people from one stratum to another
or from one status to another. It brings changes in class, occupation and power. It
involves movement from lower to higher or higher to lower. There are two types of
vertical mobility:
 Upward mobility – is when an individual moves from lower status to higher
status. For example, if the son of a peon joins a bank as an officer, it is said to
 be upward social mobility but if he loses the job due to any other reason or
inefficiency, he is downwardly mobile from his previous job.

 Downward mobility – takes place when a person moves down from one position
to another and changes his status.

b. Horizontal Mobility - refers to the movement of people from one social group to
another situated on the same level. It means that the ranks of these two groups are
not different. It indicates change in position without the change in status. For
example, if a teacher leaves one school and joins another school or a bank officer
leaves one branch to work in another or change of residence, horizontal mobility
happens.

3. May also be of two types in terms of dimension of time:

a. Inter-generational mobility: When changes in status occur from one generation

to another, it is called intergenerational mobility. For example, if the son changes
his status either by taking upon occupation of higher or lower rank with that of his
father, inter-generational mobility takes place.

b. Intra-generational mobility: When changes in status occur within one generation,

it is called intra-generational mobility. For example, the rise and fall in the
occupational structure of a family which leads to change in its social status within
one generation is called intra-generational mobility.

Social Stratification and Caste:

Under the caste system status is hereditary. It is based on birth; it is purely an ascribed
status. Once such positions are assigned, they cannot advance and improve their social
status in any way. Hence, caste as a major type of social stratification does not facilitate
vertical social mobility.

Social Stratification and Class:

Class is an “open” system. Under this system vertical mobility is absolutely free.
Movement from one status to another has no barrier. Status is based on achievement. It
is determined by the talents, wealth, money, intelligence, power, education, income, etc.
of a person. There is no inheritance of parental status.

Gender:

Like caste and class, gender is another kind of social stratification system. Gender,
perhaps is the oldest and permanent source of social differentiation. But within the broad
hierarchy of caste and class, gender cuts across caste and class. In present day Indian
society caste, class and gender are dynamic phenomena which vary between groups,
communities and regions. Recent years have witnessed a thorough and widespread
discussion on gender. It has claimed critical address within gender as a concept and as
a set of practices that occurred during the last three decades.

The origin of the concept gender can be traced to the 19th century women’s movement
and in Marxism. But it seems to have first appeared among American feminists who
wanted to reject biological determinism. Feminists prefer the term gender than sex.

But the term gender means much more than sex and more inclusive than sex. It is a
socially constructed category rather than biologically determined. The gender of a man is
masculine and a woman is feminine. Neither a man nor a woman is sex alone. Gender
refers to the socially constructed and culturally determined role that men and women
play in their day-to-day lives. Gender is the most potent significant and enormously
useful analytical concept used by the feminists.

It is a matter of social ascription, a socio-cultural construction and provided a deeper

analysis of inequalities existing between male and female. It refers to the social
institutionalization of sexual difference. In feminist literature, gender is not a value free
concept rather a value loaded term and has acquired new dimensions. It is a conceptual
tool for analysis and is used to highlight different structural relationships of inequality
between men and women. As a socially constructed differences and relations between
males and females, it varies from time to time and from place to place.

Gender is defined as the social construction of relations between women and men and
among various groups of women and men. Feminist consider gender as the socio-
cultural manifestation of being a man or a woman.

 Acording to N. Kabeer: “Gender is seen as the process by which individuals who are
born into biological categories of male or female become the social categories of men
and women through the acquisition of locally defined attributes of masculinity and
femininity.”
 According to A. Masefield: “Gender can be defined as a notion that offers a set of
frameworks within which the social and ideological construction and representation of
differences between sexes are explained.”
 According to ILO: “Gender refers to the social differences and relations between men
and women, which are learned, which vary widely among societies and cultures and
change over time.”

Thus, gender involves power structure and economic relationships. It is used to analyse
the role, responsibilities, constraints, needs of men and women in all areas. It
encompasses the social division and cultural distinctions between women and men. It
plays an important role in shaping institutions and practices in every society.

Gender and Sex

The term gender does not replace the term sex. It is necessary to distinguish between
sex and gender. The distinction between sex and gender is fundamental, since many
differences between males and females are not biological in origin. Sex refers to the
physical differences of body whereas gender refers to social, cultural and psychological
differences between males and females.

Sex refers to biological differences between male and female which are much more the
same over time and space where as gender refers to socially and culturally constructed
differences and relations between males and females which vary from place to place and
from time to time. Sex refers to male and female whereas gender refers to masculinity
and femininity. Gender is a structural feature of a society.

Forms of Social Stratification and Rural Social Stratification

Stratification is ranking of people in a society. Ranking is made on certain criteria. These

criteria include power, status and prestige. The Marxists look at stratification from the
perspective of mode of production.
As a matter of fact social stratification in contemporary sociology has become a multi-
disciplinary and multi-dimensional field of study. It is qualified by the adjective multi
because the disciplines of sociology, rural sociology, social anthropology, psychology,
political science and economics also study stratification. Because of its multi- disciplinary
nature, its approaches to study are also different.

We can categorize them into two parts:

 Marxist – analyze the social stratification in terms of made of production. Such an

approach is historical and takes into consideration the conceptual framework of
production forces and production relations. The Marxist approach to stratification has
several variants but mode of production remains the prime framework.

 Weberian approach to stratification – takes into consideration the concepts of

wealth, power and prestige. Wealth, for example, may be defined by occupational
category and its accompanying ability to produce income, or by inherited valuables
such as real estate. Prestige refers to honour and style of life; for example, how
elegant one’s lifestyle is.

Power refers to the ability to control or dominate the course of events which make up
social life. Thus positions in a society are ranked in terms of the amount of those
desirables that are attached to them. Stratification, then, involves inequality because the
higher the rank of a position, the more desirable one can get by holding that position.

Prestige is a special advantage or benefit that not everyone enjoys.

Wealth varies from one society to another. Some view wealth as the number of children
they have, some may perceive wealth as the collection of books and the number of
properties they achieved.

When we look at rural social stratification we either stress on the mode of production that
is the owners of the land, types of peasants, role of technology in production, surplus for
market and circulation of labourers. By way of example the study conducted by Jan
Breman, entitled, Of Peasants, Migrants and Paupers, in the region of south, Gujarat
takes into consideration the mode of production as a basic framework for his analysis.

Social stratification is very simple term that means inequality. And, inequality in class,
status and power or mode of production is found in all societies. Recently, the
sociologists have begun to stress on criterion of power as a major determinant in
stratification. Stratification thus is found in all the societies mechanical and organic. It is,
however, possible that in some societies stratification is elaborate whereas in some only
nominal.

Admittedly, rural stratification is not much complicated compared to urban stratification. It

is possible that in some societies the pace of social stratification is faster in comparison
to other societies, but there is certainly some pattern of stratification in all the societies.

Rural Social Stratification:

Indian rural society like any other society has its stratification pattern which is specific to
it only. In rural society, an individual is normally identified with his village. In the south,
Indian states the name of a person and also includes the name of his village.
Irawati Karve, the noted Indian anthropologist, once observed that an Indian is identified
by his caste, language and village. Viewed from this perspective the village social
stratification is synonymous with village caste. Caste is the chief identification mark of a
person in rural society.

Social Stratification in Post-Industrial Societies

Marx’s two-fold classification of class (bourgeoisie and proletariat) is no more applicable

in the post-industrial societies. New systems of social stratification, which have recently
emerged, are not associated with the means of production or not necessarily based upon
the possession of wealth.

In the post-industrial societies the majority of the labour force is engaged in the provision
of services, technical and professional workers increase in numbers, and scientific
knowledge becomes crucially important in the direction of economic, political, and social
affairs (Daniel Bell, The Coming of Post-Industrial Society, 1973). Some social scientists
have argued that a managerial class has emerged that possesses power independent of
those who technically own means of production.

The numbers of technocrats have also grown at an amazing rate in post-industrial

societies. In addition, the ranks of the lower white-collar class, such as sales and clerical
people, computer operators and other non-manual workers have drastically expanded.
(This account about the post-industrial societies is also applicable to some extent on the
changing Indian society.)

The changes in the social stratification systems of post-industrial societies have

prompted some commentators to foresee a new society. Dahrendorf (1959) believes that
we are entering a post-capitalist era where ownership of property is no longer a prereq-
uisite to membership in the upper classes.

Rather, he contends that those who exercise control in the political and economic realms
now constitute a governing class. Daniel Bell envisages a period in which those who
possess knowledge will increasingly gain in power. Utopians, such as Herbert Marcuse,
Immanuel Wallerstein, Melford Spiro, and Paul Goodman foresee different futures for
post-industrial civilization.
Stratification and Social Mobility in Urban Communities

Indian social stratification is characterised by caste and class. Urbanisation and

industrialisation have induced mobility in the stratification system. D’ Souza (1978),
however, has maintained that the role of industrialisation in bringing change in caste and
social mobility has been overemphasised.

Urban areas do provide more opportunities for social mobility, but do castes in towns and
cities succeed in raising their social status? James Freeman in his study of an urbanised
Hindu village in 1974 and Shyamlal in his study of Bhangis near Jodhpur in Rajasthan in
1975 did not perceive mobility in caste system. On the contrary, lower castes in urban
areas showed strong inclination to maintain their traditional privileges and obligations.

The other view is that in this age, one’s occupational prestige is by and large dependent
upon one’s education: the higher the education; the higher the possibility of attaining
higher occupational status. Since urban communities offer better educational facilities,
the chances of status mobility are higher here.
However, Rajendra Pandey (1974) in a comparative study of differences in occupational
aspirations of rural and urban college youth concluded that the structural background of
the rural and urban societies does make a difference to the aspirations, urges, and
values of the youth and accordingly the rural and the urban youth aspire for different
kinds of jobs.

The caste system, however, does admit mobility; but it is the group as a whole which
changes its position in the caste hierarchy. Scholars like Lynch (1969), Hardgrave (1970)
and Ashis Nandy (1978) have pointed out many instances, including those of Jatavs,
Nadars and Mahishyas where urbanisation and industrialisation have supported caste
mobility. Satish Saberwal (1976) has discussed the process of upward mobility among
the Ramgariahs, a carpenter caste of Punjab.

Characteristics of Social Stratification

1. Social-Economic classification or categorization: A stratified society is one with

distinct social classes. Most of the social stratification types are based on the social-
economic classification.

2. Universal: Social divisions are found in almost all societies and cultures (developing
countries to developed countries), sometimes deliberately and in other circumstances
subconsciously in various forms.

3. Hierarchical: Strata are arranged in hierarchical order. For example, the Indian Caste
System

4. Preserves the status quo: Categorization of people into different social classes is
meant to ensure that the status quo is preserved.
 5. Inequality in income, wealth distribution and social status: This means if a person
has a high capital income he/she falls in the upper class. Those with lower-income fall
in the lower class and so on.

6. Unequal control over natural resources such as land: For example, the high-class
or the rich class people can own more land or other resources. On the other hand, the
poor or the low-class people own fewer resources.

7. Is in diverse forms: Diverse in nature & remains same with only differences in the
name. Caste social stratification, slavery stratification, high-class, middle class, etc.,
are few such examples.

8. It has consequences: such as racial and class discrimination, unjust application of

the law, and increasing income gap between the rich and the poor. It also leads to
resentment between social classes.

9. It is purely social: It does not focus on natural abilities of an individual other than
inequalities that have been caused by the society.

10. Inequality of opportunity: Some strata of society will usually have more
opportunities for work, education and so on than others.

11. Stereotyping: Sometimes, people will stereotype the members of different social
strata, cementing a particular image of them in the public’s mind.

12. Dissatisfaction: The inequalities described above can lead to dissatisfaction, and
even unrest, among the populace in a stratified society.

13. Conclusion: It is very important to identify and to combat the inequalities that are
associated with social stratification.

References:

Saluba , Dennis J. et. Al Understanding Culture, Society and Politics, Rex Bookstore.

Google Arts and Culture https://artsandculture.google.com/theme/what-s-the-

difference-between-modern-and-contemporary-art-%C2%A0/vwKiW17vbvl3JA?hl=en