Social Stratification System and Its Effect

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Components of the social stratification system
Forms of Social Stratification
Conclusion
References

Introduction

The social stratification system involves the grouping of individuals in relation to social and economic status in the societal setup. The system not only adds value to the traditional influence on wealth but also influences the treatment of an individual in society. This misconception treatment to individuals makes reference in relation to their race, appearance, race, sex among other distinguishing characteristics. In the general perspective of the stratification system, both individuals and groups of people are categorically differentiated in various classes based on their general weakened characteristics or sit off the invalid characteristics.

Social stratification rarely provides a clerical account of the event involved in the formation of a real structural-functional unit considered to be of productive nature in the societal economy. Traditionally, the idea of stratification has been viewed in a crude way but with the current sociological world, stratification is well perceived based on the Marxian theory. This system generates a sense of inequality in society. The idea of social stratification is currently inevitable in ideological, political, and public moral debates and controversial scenarios based on social science.

The social stratification system constitutes of various components and among them includes processes that govern the institutions involved in the system. This defines certain types of desirable personality traits in society. The second component involves the distribution of the governing rules across the society to protect the desired traits and cultivate them in the societal setting. Third, the system involves the idea of a mobility mechanism that is of great linkage of different positions in the individuals in the society to enhance an aspect of inequality over the most significant element resources in the society. Based on this system, it is evident that inequality prevails in two basic matching forms that are: matching of the societal established position in the society to reward components of unequal nature. This follows the strict allocation of the society members to the society in relation to their appropriate positions to facilitate an effective rewarding process.

There are various forms of social stratification, the tribal system commonly known as primitivism as a form of social stratification system has existed since the beginning of the human evolutionary process. This form that originated from the Precambrian period has existed till the Neolithic period that occurred about 1,000 decades ago.

However, societies have often assumed various stratification forms due to the total unlimited societal distribution factors of the rewards. This cut-down surplus of reward distribution has gradually imposed the relative corresponding sources to the general inequality level. Tribal societies have been treated by most of the observers as primitive in the community because most of the productive resources were basically under the ownership of the tribal class members whereby they were evenly distributed in the society. The upcoming of power-related positions in the society also played a vital role in instilling the inequality change in the society. For instance, the ownership of power in the society is only allocated to individuals based on the capability of an individual through the exhibition of leadership superiority skills and not inherited as it used to be during the pre-emergence of the social stratification system. The meritocratic system of power distribution used in modern days has been considered to be prototypically modernized in one way or the other.

However, the system may be understood on the fact that the prevailing development in the society is usually experienced at juvenile levels thus no doubt for uneven distribution of resources as a fact of the limited surplus parse. The limited surplus could not support the luxury life achievement thus improvising less adaptive forms of resource distribution. The problem of resource scarcity was solved in the meritocratic stratification systems by the emergence of the agrarian revolution that ensured plenty of surplus of economic resources.

Another prominent form of social stratification is the Asiatic mode commonly known as a precursor of agrarian advancement. This form is basically portrayed by the classes of individuals that are poorly developed and the most powerful elite that is liable to facilitate agricultural surplus distribution. This could only be achieved through heavily imposed taxes and rents. This form best explains how inequality can be affiliated by the dictatorship of the officials to the less fortunate individuals in the society as a result of the institutionalized property absence. The Asiatic mode is predominantly influenced by political swings compared to the feudalism impact of the western culture. The major outstanding component that distinguishes feudalism from other forms of stratification system is that it was rarely owned. However, it was nobility thus owned by a minimal number of estates in addition to containing the legal power of serfs. A serf would be termed to be fraudulence if only it was fled to the other country according to Nutini with regard to social stratification. A serf is considered to be any action involving theft cases of ones own lord. The status of safe may sound to be the same as slavery but they greatly differ in a smaller perspective although slavery is of limited cases involving loss of workers control over their labor power. For greater emphasis on the system of agrarian stratification, it is clearly evident that feudalism played a major role in establishing a rigid and stable stratification of different classes.

Another form of social stratification was the caste system of India. This system was based on a few social statuses namely: first was the hierarchical classification of individuals based on the wealth, ethnic status, and economic status that basically dealt with the accessibility of both services and goods at the societal level. The second status of this system is based on the pleasure rules considered to be restrictive measures of instilling strong and permanent caste mobility. This form contracts the social stratification of caste membership to be permanent and hereditary in some social communities. Another status of caste form is the increased degree of both occupational and physical segregation encased by rituals and principles that sideline the intermittent caste in the society.

Finally, it is all about the justification of ideologies that introduce society to the extreme inequality forms. The distinctive element that enhances a mere developmental ideology based on the closure rules is the noneconomic character underlying the societal hierarchy. The development of the egalitarian conceptual elements of the social stratification is well expressed in feudalism, systems of divergent slavery status, and finally the caste form that exists in India. The most well-versed illustration believed to be of the exemplary exhibition is the ideal European revolution of the 18th and 19th centuries respectively. During this period, the egalitarian mechanisms to establish a conditional social stratification were pitted contrary to the privileged political powers based on the nobility of the stratification status.

Social stratification is a time looked at from a different perspective. At this level of establishment, the system is perceived in a different perspective whereby inequalities at both class and socioeconomic levels are focused. With regard to the elements like race, gender, and ethnicity, the system takes a different directional approach. It is during this level that most of the omissions become reflective and much of the improperly strategized changes are instilled. The level changes to be an effective state when different classes of people become secondary and tertiary affiliation forms of change.

However, the distinctive classes become more of strengthening factors to the political actions thus becoming the core determinants of social changes. The stratification class formulated to impose inequality in the society has led to the intellectual breakdown of the socioeconomic statuses thus becoming of a restrictive nature to the global economy.

The early interpersonal modification with regard to the social stratification system has greatly intensified its interest in the social behavior of the developed classes of different individuals. By considering the group membership status, it is clearly evident that there is a closer interrelationship among the formulated groups in a given society. The concern about the grouping became intensified as a result of emerging upper classes and the American specialty based on the ethnic and racial grouping. This influenced personal activities all-round with the aim of boosting the economy thus generating personal stress in the sense of developing political action in their extremity. Currently, the old dimensional technicalities have been scrubbed off and encased by the new variants patched on the front intellect. Marginalized variants have been commonly in use with an allegation of creating essential classes in society. The commonly used variant is the postmodernist that emphasizes the theories that are analytical with the aim of achieving a stabilized classical affiliation.

In some postmodern regulatory forms, status such as race, gender, and ethnicity are of little significance and in fact, may end up diminishing based on the societal approach. The reason behind the diminishing of such statuses is the fact that they are not recognized parse, instead all members involved usually encounter presumptive congeries nature in response to politically imposed forms. They mostly emerge as evoked and dismissal statuses in society as a result of the effective social stratification process. In the past few years, the reckoning social stratification sociologists have focused basically on ethnicity, race, and gender with an aggregate focus on the essential subdued changes in socioeconomic activities globally. The new literal subject concerning the mentioned elements has been developed and these are racial relation studies, studies in gender, and finally the political conflict study.

To come up with an effective working schedule of these studies so as to enhance a better understanding of the social stratification system, one has to have a closer look at a few distinguishing elements and these are the nature in which scriptive solidarities are addressed based on the micro and macro-research levels in relation to their strategic class formation process. Another element is the way forward to attain nature research based on the exploration of an individuals ethnicity, race, and gender effectiveness in relation to the chances of life purposed for an individual in the society. The third element is focused in the perspective of nature in which scholars perceive the entire social stratification mechanism. The social process of enhancing stratification is perceived by scholars in different ways, for instance, there is a developed scriptive class denoted as black and white. This is perceived in the sources and influential effects of the solidarity and ethnic groups especially in the political field that is liable to causing conflict. The interlocked relations between various classes of organizations, racism, and patriarchy are looked at differently under social stratification as forms of distorted organizations that are attributed to causing inequalities.

Conclusion

The social stratification system not only adds value to the traditional influence on wealth but also influences the treatment of an individual in society by grouping individuals into different classes based on race, ethnicity, and gender. This misconception treatment to individuals makes reference in relation to their race, appearance, race, sex among other distinguishing characteristics. In the general perspective of the stratification system, both individuals and groups of people are categorically differentiated in various classes based on their general weakened characteristics or sit off the invalid characteristics. Social stratification rarely provides a clerical account of the event involved in the formation of a real structural-functional unit considered to be of productive nature in the societal economy. Traditionally, the idea of stratification has been viewed in a crude way but with the current sociological world, stratification is well perceived based on the Marxian theory. This system generates a sense of inequality in the society thus hindering socioeconomic development.

References

Gruskym, B. D. (2001). Social Stratification: Class, Race, and Gender in Sociological Perspective. Boston: Westview Press. P.501.

Hauser, R. M. & Featherman, D. L. (2001). The Process of Stratification: Trends and Analyses. New York: Academic Press. P. 71.

Herrnstein R. J, & Murray C. (2004). The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in Life. New York: Simon and Schuster. P213.

Kendall, D. (2008). Sociology in Our Times: The Essentials. London: Cengage Learning.

Macionis, J. J. & Garber M. L. (2011). Sociology (7^th Ed). Montreal: Pearson Education Canada.

Nutini, G.H. (2005). Social Stratification and Mobility in Central Veracruz. Texas: University of Texas. P.17.

Saha, D. (2006). Sociology of Social Stratification. Chicago: Global vision publishing House, P.5.

Click Here To Order Now!

Introduction

Components of the social stratification system

Forms of Social Stratification

Conclusion

References

Related