Stratification Chapter 14 Lecture PowerPoint © W. W. Norton & Company, 2008

Social Stratification Systematic inequality between groups of people Unequal distribution of wealth, income, prestige, power, knowledge, and other resources “Structured:” built into social systems You May Ask Yourself Copyright © 2008 W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.

On what dimensions does stratification exist? Assets, wealth, money (“class” views) Prestige, respect (“status” views) Education, occupation, income (“socioeconomic status” view) Power and influence (“power” view) The debate is over which is most important or most basic

Views of Inequality: Economics and Class Jean-Jacques Rousseau (late 1700’s) Social inequality stems from private property Private property creates unequal access to resources Ultimately leads to resentment and conflict. Viewed human nature as basically good; private property as the problem Influenced socialist thought. Photo Courtesy of Getty. You May Ask Yourself Copyright © 2008 W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.

Views of Inequality: Economics and Class Adam Ferguson and John Millar (Scottish Enlightment) private property and competition are good because some people are getting ahead and creating assets (stored wealth) provides an incentive to work hard and be productive ultimately leads to improved organization and efficiency Thomas Malthus: Inequality keeps population in check – too much growth = poverty and starvation, thinning out population Generally harsh view of the poor Did not consider innovation, improved food production You May Ask Yourself Copyright © 2008 W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.

Views of Inequality: Economics and Class Hegel’s Master-Slave Dialectic social relationships follow “master-slave” model master is as dependent on the slave as slave is on master Can’t live without slave’s labor and services Basic social relationship is domination and exploitation Ideas about equality would evolve over time master-slave model would die out Did it happen? More equal opportunity today, upward mobility is possible Employees still dependent on corporations, still exploited You May Ask Yourself Copyright © 2008 W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.

Views of Inequality: Economics and Class Karl Marx: class defined by relationship to means of production Saw two major classes - proletariat, or working class, and bourgeoisie or employing class. Under capitalist system, employer makes profit by extracting “surplus value” from employee - i.e. getting more work than employee is for. Argued that this oppressive system caused much misery and would eventually self-destruct Erik Olin Wright developed the concept of contradictory class locations, which is the idea that people can occupy locations in the class structure that fall between the two “pure” classes defined by Marx. 7 You May Ask Yourself Copyright © 2008 W.W. Norton & Company, Inc. 7

Views of Inequality: Economics and Class Erik Wright: Marxist class categories for 20th century Four main relationships to means of production “contradictory” locations (manager, small employer) may fall between capitalists and workers Owns business Does not own business Controls others’ labor Capitalist (Bourgeoisie) Manager (not part of Marx’s classification) Does not control labor Small employer (Petit bourgeoisie) Worker (Proletariat)

Views of Inequality – status Davis and Moore: structural functional theory Occupations are basis for rewards such as prestige and income Prestige is primary – other rewards flow from it. What determines prestige of an occupation? Basically supply and demand explanation Importance to society’s survival Amount of human capital required (training, talent) Desirability Simplistic, has been criticized for many reasons

Views of Inequality – socioeconomic status Stratification as combination of education, occupational prestige, and income Argues that all three are important Research has focused on how these things are achieved (“status attainment” models) Family background, parents’ status Aspirations and goals Influence of significant others Educational processes

Figure 14.6 | How the Status-Attainment Model Works

How Is America Stratified Today? Socioeconomic status may be used to define social classes: upper upper class – old wealth, long established social networks, family ties (Rockefellers) lower upper – new wealth, “self-made” (Bill Gates) upper middle – professional, educated, comfortable lifestyle lower middle – technical, white collar, less secure, lower income working – manual labor, crafts, services, usually self-supporting lower – may not earn living wage or work continuously, may need assistance to support families, may include the poor You May Ask Yourself Copyright © 2008 W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.

Income inequality in the U.S. Rich get richer, poor get poorer, shrinking middle class

Figure 14.3 | Average CEO Pay versus Production Worker Pay, 1970-2000

Views of stratification: Power Weber – money may bring power but does not guarantee that power will be exercised. Positions in organizations may have more power and influence. Looked at stratification in terms of ability to influence organizations and political processes. Power is correlated with prestige and wealth.

Figure 14.1 | Executive Networks Corporate affiliations of J. P. Morgan Chase & Co.’s Board of Directors, 1999. More than 80 percent of America’s 1,000 largest corporations share at least one director with another large company.

Standards of Equality – what should be the goal? Ontological equality - everyone is created equal. Goal is equal respect and status within the culture. Equality of Condition – “level playing field,” same starting point for everyone. Goals may include increasing diversity & using affirmative action. Equality of Opportunity - inequality of condition is acceptable as long as everyone has the same opportunities for advancement and is judged by the same standards Fits most closely with modern capitalist society arguments made by 1960’s civil rights activists Photo Courtesy of AP Photo.

Forms of Stratification Estate System is a politically based system of stratification characterized by limited social mobility that is best exemplified in the social organization of feudal Europe and the pre–Civil War American South. Caste System is a system of stratification based on hereditary notions of religious and theological purity and generally offers no prospects for social mobility. The varna system in India is the most common example today of a caste system. Class System is an economically based system of stratification characterized by somewhat loose social mobility and categories based on roles in the production process rather than individual characteristics. You May Ask Yourself Copyright © 2008 W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.

Social Reproduction versus Social Mobility Social mobility = movement between different positions within a system of social stratification Structural mobility = inevitable from changes in the economy, such as the expansion of high-tech jobs and loss of other jobs. Cause of upward mobility in last 50 years. Exchange mobility = people “trading” positions; distribution of jobs stays the same, with some people moving up and others moving down. Photo Courtesy of Getty. You May Ask Yourself Copyright © 2008 W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.

Table 14.2 | Mobility Table: Father’s Occupation by Son’s First Occupation

Global Stratification Countries stratified into 3 levels: Core (wealthy, highly developed, slow pop. growth, high standard of living) – U.S., Europe Periphery (poor, less developed, rapid pop. growth, lower standard of living) -Africa Semi-periphery (beginning to develop; may become core) India, China

Global Stratification Dominated by multinational or transnational corporations Based in core countries Divide operations among several countries Use labor of periphery countries Profits go to corporate elite, some to core countries Outside control of any one government Extremely powerful

Implications for core countries Access to corporate markets, energy, capital, infrastructure High political power High standard of living Jobs lost to periphery countries High cost of national security = funds diverted from social programs

Implications for periphery countries Dependent on core countries Aid from core countries has declined High unemployment, poverty Migration to urban areas, disruption of villages More jobs for women, BUT their daughters abandon school for household labor Central Asia, Africa: “world of refugees” Mostly women and children Most countries unprepared to handle refugees