Inequality characterizes the uneven distribution of scarce resources of society - money, power, education, and prestige - between different strata or strata of the population. On the inequality scale, the rich will be at the top and the poor at the bottom.
If wealth is a sign of the upper class, then income - the flow of cash receipts for a certain calendar period, say, for a month or a year - characterizes all sectors of society. Income is any amount of money received in the form of salaries, pensions, annuities, benefits, alimony, royalties, etc. Even the charity of beggars, obtained by begging and expressed in monetary terms, is a kind of income.
For this reason, the following population groups can be distinguished: (Figure 1.1).
Figure 1.1 - Units of measurement of economic inequality by population groups
From Figure 1.1 it follows that the population is divided into 4 groups:
1. Rich
2. Middle class
The fact is that along with a broad understanding of income, there is a narrow one. In a statistical sense, income is the amount of money that people earn due to belonging to a certain profession (type of occupation) or due to the legalized disposal of property. However, beggars, even if they regularly earn a living by begging, do not provide any valuable service to society. And statistics take into account only those sources of income that are associated with the provision of valuable, socially significant services or with the production of goods. Beggars are included in the so-called underclass, i.e. literally not a class, or a layer below all classes. Thus, beggars drop out of the official income pyramid.
The essence of social inequality lies in the unequal access of various categories of the population to socially significant benefits, scarce resources, liquid values. The essence of economic inequality lies in the fact that a narrow segment of society owns most of the national wealth. The majority's income can be distributed in different ways. For example, in the United States, the income level of the majority suggests that there is a large middle class, while in Russia the income level of the majority of the population is often below the subsistence level. Accordingly, the income pyramid, their distribution between population groups, in other words, inequality, can be depicted in the first case as a rhombus, and in the second as a cone. As a result, we get a stratification profile, or inequality profile.
The essence of social inequality
A variety of relationships, roles, positions lead to differences between people in each particular society. The problem boils down to somehow ordering these relationships between categories of people that differ in many aspects.
What is inequality? In the very general view inequality means that people live in conditions in which they have unequal access to limited resources of material and spiritual consumption. To describe the system of inequality between groups of people in sociology, the concept of "social stratification" is widely used.
When considering the problem of social inequality, it is quite justified to proceed from the theory of socio - economic heterogeneity of labor. Performing qualitatively unequal types of labor, satisfying social needs to varying degrees, people sometimes find themselves employed in economically heterogeneous labor, for such types of labor have different assessments of their social utility.
The essence of social inequality, as we have already said, lies in the unequal access of various categories of the population to socially significant benefits, scarce resources, and liquid values. The essence of economic inequality lies in the fact that a minority of the population always owns most of the national wealth. In other words, the smallest part of society receives the highest incomes, and the majority of the population receives the middle and lowest incomes. The latter can be distributed in different ways. In the United States, the smallest (as well as the highest) incomes are received by a minority of the population, while the average - by the majority. In Russia today, the majority receives the lowest income, the average income is a relatively large group, and the highest is the minority of the population.
It is the socio-economic heterogeneity of labor that is not only a consequence, but also the reason for the appropriation by some people of power, property, prestige and the absence of all these advantages in the social hierarchy of others. Each of the groups develops its own values and norms and relies on them. If representatives of such groups are placed on a hierarchical basis, then these groups are social strata.
In social stratification, there is a tendency for the inheritance of positions. The operation of the principle of inheritance of positions leads to the fact that not all capable and educated individuals have an equal chance of occupying positions of power, high principles and well-paid positions. There are two selection mechanisms at work here: unequal access to truly high-quality education and unequal opportunities for gaining positions by equally trained individuals.
Social stratification has a traditional character: inequality of position different groups people persist throughout the history of civilization. Even in primitive societies, age and gender, combined with physical strength, were an important criterion for stratification.
Imagine a situation when there are numerous social strata in society, the social distance between which is small, the level of mobility is high, the lower strata make up a minority of members of society, rapid technological growth constantly raises the “bar” of meaningful work in the lower tiers of production positions, social protection of the weak, among other things, guarantees the strong and advanced calmness and realization of potencies. It is difficult to deny what society is, such inter-layer interaction is rather in its own way perfect model than everyday reality.
Most modern societies are far from this model. They are characterized by a concentration of power and resources among a numerically small elite. The concentration of such status attributes as power, property and education among the elite hinders social interaction between the elite and other strata, leads to an excessive social distance between it and the majority. This means that the middle class is small and the top is deprived of connection with the rest of the groups. Obviously, such a social order fosters destructive conflicts.
Even a cursory glance at the people around us gives reason to talk about their dissimilarity. People are different by gender, age, temperament, height, hair color, intelligence level and many other characteristics. Nature has endowed one with musical abilities, another with strength, a third with beauty, and for someone she has prepared the fate of a weak invalid. Differences between people, due to their physiological and mental characteristics, are called natural.
Natural differences are far from harmless, they can become the basis for the emergence of unequal relations between individuals. The strong force the weak, the cunning triumph over the simpletons. Inequality arising from natural differences is the first form of inequality, in one form or another, manifested in some species of animals. However, in the main human is social inequality, inextricably linked with social differences, social differentiation.
Social called those differences, which generated by social factors: way of life (urban and rural population), division of labor (workers of mental and manual labor), social roles (father, doctor, politician), etc., which leads to differences in the degree of ownership, income, power, achievement, prestige, education.
Different levels social development are basis for social inequality, the emergence of the rich and the poor, the stratification of society, its stratification (stratum-layer, which includes people with the same income, power, education, prestige).
Income- the amount of cash receipts received by an individual per unit of time. It can be labor, or it can be the ownership of property that "works".
Education- a set of knowledge gained in educational institutions... His level is measured by the number of years of study. Let's say incomplete secondary school- 9 years. The professor has over 20 years of education behind him.
Power-the ability to impose your will on other people, regardless of their desire. It is measured by the number of people to which it applies.
Prestige- This is an assessment of the position of an individual in society, which has developed in public opinion.
Causes of social inequality
Can a society exist without social inequality? Apparently, in order to answer the question posed, it is necessary to understand the reasons that give rise to the unequal position of people in society. In sociology, there is no single universal explanation for this phenomenon. Various scientific and methodological schools and directions interpret it in different ways. Let's highlight the most interesting and noteworthy approaches.
Functionalism explains inequality in terms of differentiation social functions carried out by different layers, classes, communities. The functioning and development of society are possible only thanks to the division of labor, when each social group carries out the solution of the corresponding vital tasks for the entire integrity of the tasks: some are engaged in the production of material goods, others create spiritual values, others manage, etc. For the normal life of society an optimal combination of all types of human activity is needed... Some are more important, others less. So, based on the hierarchy of social functions, a corresponding hierarchy of classes, layers is formed executing them. At the top of the social ladder are those who carry out general leadership and governing the country, because only they can support and ensure the unity of society, create the necessary conditions for the successful performance of other functions.
Explaining social inequality by the principle of functional utility is fraught with a serious danger of subjectivist interpretation. Indeed, why is this or that function considered as more significant if society as an integral organism cannot exist without functional diversity? This approach does not allow explaining such realities as the recognition of an individual's belonging to a higher stratum in the absence of his direct participation in management. That is why T. Parsons, considering the social hierarchy as a necessary factor ensuring the viability of the social system, links its configuration with the system of dominant values in society. In his understanding, the location of social strata on the hierarchical ladder is determined by the ideas formed in society about the importance of each of them.
Observations of the actions, behavior of specific individuals gave impetus to the development status explanation of social inequality... Each person, occupying a certain place in society, acquires his own status. is the inequality of statuses, arising both from the ability of individuals to perform a particular social role (for example, to be competent to manage, to have the appropriate knowledge and skills to be a doctor, lawyer, etc.), and from the capabilities that allow a person to achieve this or that position in society (ownership of property, capital, origin, belonging to influential political forces).
Consider economic view to the problem. In accordance with this point of view, the root cause of social inequality lies in the unequal attitude towards property, the distribution of material wealth. Most vividly this approach manifested itself in Marxism... According to his version, namely the emergence of private property led to social stratification of society, education antagonistic classes... The exaggeration of the role of private property in the social stratification of society led Marx and his followers to the conclusion that it was possible to eliminate social inequality by establishing public ownership of the means of production.
The lack of a unified approach to explaining the origins of social inequality is due to the fact that it is always perceived at at least two levels. First, as a property of society. Written history knows no societies without social inequality. The struggle of people, parties, groups, classes is a struggle for the possession of great social opportunities, advantages and privileges. If inequality is an inherent property of society, then it carries a positive functional load. Society reproduces inequality because it needs it as a source of livelihood and development.
Secondly, inequality always perceived as unequal relationships between people, groups... Therefore, it becomes natural to strive to find the origins of this unequal position in the peculiarities of a person's position in society: in the possession of property, power, in the personal qualities of individuals. This approach is now widespread.
Inequality is multifaceted and manifests itself in various links of a single social organism: in the family, in an institution, at an enterprise, in small and large social groups. It is necessary condition the organization social life ... Parents, having an advantage in experience, skills, and financial resources in comparison with their young children, have the opportunity to influence the latter, facilitating their socialization. The functioning of any enterprise is carried out on the basis of the division of labor into managerial and subordinate-executive. The emergence of a leader in the team helps its cohesion, transformation into a sustainable education, but at the same time it is accompanied by the provision of leader of special rights.
Any organization strives to preserve inequalities seeing in him ordering start, without which it is impossible reproduction of social ties and the integration of the new. The same property inherent in society as a whole.
Ideas about social stratification
All societies famous stories, were organized in such a way that some social groups always had a privileged position over others, which was expressed in an unequal distribution of social benefits and powers. In other words, social inequality is inherent in all societies without exception. Even the ancient philosopher Plato argued that any city, no matter how small it may be, is actually divided into two halves - one for the poor, the other for the rich, and they are at enmity with each other.
Therefore, one of the basic concepts of modern sociology is “social stratification” (from the Latin stratum - layer + facio - I do). Thus, the Italian economist and sociologist V. Pareto believed that social stratification, changing in form, existed in all societies. At the same time, as the famous sociologist of the XX century believed. P. Sorokin, in any society, at any time, there is a struggle between the forces of stratification and the forces of alignment.
The concept of "stratification" came to sociology from geology, where it refers to the location of the layers of the Earth along a vertical line.
Under social stratification we will understand the vertical section of the location of individuals and groups in horizontal layers (strata) according to such characteristics as income inequality, access to education, the amount of power and influence, professional prestige.
In Russian, the analogue of this recognized concept is social stratification.
The stratification is based on social differentiation - the process of the emergence of functionally specialized institutions and the division of labor. A highly developed society is characterized by a complex and differentiated structure, a diverse and rich status-role system. At the same time, inevitably, some social statuses and roles are preferable and more productive for individuals, as a result of which they are more prestigious and desirable for them, and some are considered by the majority as somewhat humiliating, associated with a lack of social prestige and a low standard of living in general. It does not follow from this that all statuses that have arisen as a product of social differentiation are arranged in a hierarchical order; some of them, for example age-related, do not contain grounds for social inequality. Thus, the status of a young child and the status of a nursing infant are not unequal, they are simply different.
Inequality between people exists in any society. This is quite natural and logical, given that people differ in their abilities, interests, life preferences, value orientations etc. In every society there are the poor and the rich, the educated and the uneducated, the entrepreneurial and the unacceptable, the powerless and the powerless. In this regard, the problem of the origin of social inequality, attitudes towards it and ways to eliminate it have always aroused increased interest, and not only among thinkers and politicians, but also among ordinary people who view social inequality as injustice.
In the history of social thought, the inequality of people was explained in different ways: the initial inequality of souls, divine providence, the imperfection of human nature, functional necessity by analogy with the body.
German economist K. Marx linked social inequality with the emergence of private property and the struggle between the interests of various classes and social groups.
German sociologist R. Dahrendorf also believed that economic and status inequality underlying the ongoing conflict of groups and classes and the struggle for the redistribution of power and statuses is formed as a result of the action of the market mechanism for regulating supply and demand.
Russian-American sociologist P. Sorokin explained the inevitability of social inequality by the following factors: internal biopsychic differences of people; environment(natural and social), objectively placing individuals in an unequal position; the joint collective life of individuals, which requires the organization of relations and behavior, which leads to the stratification of society into controlled and ruled.
American sociologist T. Pearson explained the existence of social inequality in every society by the presence of a hierarchized system of values. For example, in American society, success in business and career is considered the main social value; therefore, scientists have a higher status and income. technological specialties, directors of factories, etc., while in Europe the dominant value is the "preservation of cultural samples", in connection with which the society gives special prestige to humanities intellectuals, clergymen, university professors.
Social inequality, being inevitable and necessary, manifests itself in all societies at all stages of historical development; only the forms and degree of social inequality change historically. Otherwise, individuals would have lost the incentive to engage in complex and laborious, dangerous or uninteresting activities, to improve their qualifications. With the help of inequality in income and prestige, society encourages individuals to engage in necessary, but difficult and unpleasant professions, encourages more educated and talented, etc.
The problem of social inequality is one of the most acute and topical in modern Russia... Feature of the social structure Russian society there is a strong social polarization - the division of the population into poor and rich in the absence of a significant middle stratum, which is the basis of an economically stable and developed state. The strong social stratification characteristic of modern Russian society reproduces a system of inequality and injustice, in which the possibilities for independent life self-realization and social status improvement are limited for a fairly large part of the population of Russia.
Social inequality - it is a type of social division in which individual members of society or groups are at different levels of the social ladder (hierarchy) and have unequal opportunities, rights and responsibilities.
The main inequality indicators:
- different levels of access to resources, both physical and moral (for example, women in Ancient Greece, who were not allowed to participate in the Olympic Games);
- different working conditions.
Causes of social inequality.
French sociologist Emile Durkheim deduced two reasons for social inequality:
- The need to encourage the best in their business, that is, those who are of great benefit to society.
- Different levels of personal qualities and talent in people.
Robert Michels put forward another reason: the protection of the privileges of power. When the size of the community exceeds some a certain number people, they nominate the chief, or a whole group, and give him more powers than everyone else.
Social inequality criteria.
Key inequality criteria outlined by Max Weber:
- Wealth (income difference).
- Prestige (difference in honor and respect).
- Power (difference in the number of subordinates).
Inequality hierarchy.
There are two types of hierarchy, usually represented as geometric shapes: pyramid(a bunch of oligarchs and a huge number of the poor, and the poorer, the greater their number) and rhombus(few oligarchs, few poor, and the bulk of the middle class). The rhombus is preferable to the pyramid from the point of view of the stability of the social system. Roughly speaking, in the diamond-shaped version, the satisfied middle peasants will not allow a handful of poor people to stage a coup and a civil war. There is no need to go far for an example. In Ukraine, the middle class was far from being the majority, and disgruntled residents of poor western and central villages overthrew power in the country. As a result, the pyramid overturned, but remained a pyramid. Above there are already other oligarchs, and below there is still a large part of the country's population.
Solving the problem of social inequality.
It is natural that social inequality is perceived as social injustice, especially by those who are in the hierarchy of social division at the lowest level. In modern society, the issue of social inequality is in the introduction of the bodies of social policy. Their responsibilities include:
- Introduction of various compensations for socially unprotected segments of the population.
- Helping poor families.
- Benefit to the unemployed.
- Determination of the minimum wage.
- Social insurance.
- Development of education.
- Healthcare.
- Ecology problems .
- Improving the qualifications of workers.
Social inequality- conditions under which people have unequal access to such social benefits as money, power and prestige; these are some types of relationships between people: personal inequality, inequality of opportunities to achieve desired goals (inequality of chances).
Social inequality was cause and effect social stratification . The main measure of inequality is the amount of liquid assets; in modern society, this function is usually given to money. Amount of money determines the place of an individual or family in social stratification.
Social inequality in power relations manifested itself in the ability of a certain social subject (social stratum, or stratum) to determine in its own interests the goals and direction of the activities of other social subjects (regardless of their interests), to dispose of mothers, information and status resources society, to form and impose rules and norms of behavior. The key role in measuring social inequality by power relations belongs to the management of resources, which allows the ruling subject to subjugate other people.
Social inequality by level of education and the prestige of social status , profession, position, occupation is determined by inequality of starting conditions or unequal conditions for the development of various social strata and strata (real injustice, infringement of natural human rights, the creation of artificial social barriers, monopolization of conditions and rules of social production ) .
Social inequality characterizes not so much the functional spheres of society and their organization, as the relative position of individual individuals and social groups. By itself, such an approach to identifying the social structure presupposes comparison, assessment, concretization and personification of subjects, as a result of which theories of social inequality are often not devoid of ideological bias, value preferences and conflictological interpretations of the authors.
Theories of social inequality are divided into two fundamental directions: functionalist and conflictological (Marxist).
Functionalism, in the traditions of E. Durkheim, deduces social inequality from the division of labor: mechanical (natural, age and gender) and organic (arising from training and professional specialization). Since stratification is viewed as a product of the division of labor, functionalists believe that social inequality is primarily determined by the significance and prestige of the functions performed for society.
In modern society, the profession has become a criterion for social stratification and the professional status of a department about a person or a social group. closely related to such bases of stratification as income, power and prestige. Therefore, education will be considered as a source of an increase in the social capital of an individual, the opportunity to get good. profession, provide more high. standard of living, gain a new status.
In Marxism, the main focus is on the problems of class inequality and exploitation. Appropriately in conflictological theories the dominant role in the system of social reproduction of differentiating (dividing society into groups and layers) relations of property and power is usually emphasized. This logic of describing inequality is well applicable to dynamic transitional societies undergoing revolutions and reforms, since the redistribution of the social structure and changes in the general “rules of the game” are always associated with the institutions of power - property. The nature of the formation of elites and the nature of the overflow of social capital (coercive or trust, exploitative or equivalent) depend on who gets control over significant public resources and on what conditions.
Considering a person as an active creator of society (as a subject, producer, source of constant changes in society), one can imagine inequality as a social good, a way of leveling starting positions due to competition, as a mechanism for consolidating the newly won social status and accompanying privileges, a system of incentives (reward and punishment), a condition for the priority of "passionarity", maintaining the potential for survival, social activity, creativity, innovation.
Inequality is unfair because all people have equal rights; secondly, inequality is fair, since it allows differentiated and targeted compensation for the social costs of different people.
The classics of "classics" (O. Comte, G. Spencer), "modern" (M. Weber, P. Sorokin, T. Parsons) and postmodern socialism (for example, P. Bourdieu) directly speak of the fundamental and inviolability of the principle of social inequality and its high functional significance for the organization of communities. Specific forms of inequality undergo modifications, the principle itself always manifests itself.
T. Parsons focuses on the unique and therefore fundamental functions of the social system, which for this reason acquire the character of a social monopoly. The indispensability, obligation and qualitative difference of these functions predetermine the specialization and professionalization (consolidation) of separate social groups for them, where energetically saturated (economic, producing) communities are subject to information-rich (political, supportive, culture-reproducing) communities.
M. Weber believed that the process of social stratification and the occupation of more advantageous positions in society is organized quite complexly, identifying three coordinates that determine the position of people and groups in social space; wealth, power, social prestige... Such a model is not just multifactorial, it marks a transition from a focused and linear to a spatial exploratory vision of the problem, when the dynamics of social dispositions is actually viewed as a system of vector displacements.
V modern world formed new system relations of inequality in social space. The ratio of forms of ownership, institutions of power change, some groups and strata disappear, others appear, the third are split, the social role and status of the fourth change, etc.
Trends in the transformation of the social structure in Russia are determined by: 1) the transformation of institutional foundations, primarily the emergence of private property and the development of entrepreneurship on its basis; 2) profound changes in the employment system (the system of planned formation, distribution and use work force giving way to not just a free, but a "wild" labor market; 3) a decline in the standard of living of the overwhelming majority of the population; 4) social anomie (destruction of one value-normative system and the lack of formation of another) and 5) social deprivation, restriction or deprivation of access to material and spiritual resources necessary to meet basic life needs.
The basis of the modern social structure is still formed by the social groups of Soviet society - the working class, the peasantry, the intelligentsia (although their social role and quantitative indicators); new socio-structural layers also appeared.
The main trends are the deepening of social inequality (economic, political, social) and the marginalization of a significant part of the population. Inequality between regions deepens, reaching a ratio of 1:10.
The process of forming a new social structure and its composition proceeds in three ways, predetermined by basic changes in the forms of ownership.
The first way is the emergence of new social communities based on the pluralization of forms of ownership: these are specific layers of hired workers and engineering and technical workers employed in the parastatal and private sectors of the economy. labor agreements or permanently under employment contracts, employees of mixed enterprises and organizations with foreign capital, etc.
The second way is to change, on the basis of the transformation of the state form of ownership, the position of traditional class-group communities: their boundaries, quantitative and qualitative characteristics, the emergence of borderline and marginal layers, etc.
The third way is the emergence of strata-strata based on the interaction of various forms of ownership: managers - a new management stratum, a new elite, middle strata, etc.
The social structure of Russian society looks like a "triangle pressed down to the base" (in contrast to the "lemon" in developed countries or "Eiffel Tower" - in Latin American); the state of marginality that accompanies the forced transition of a person from one socio-professional group to another and significantly changes the characteristics of the socio-professional status acquires special significance in it.
The "new poor" have appeared. And earlier, in Soviet time, there were enough poor people in the country. But more qualified, more complex work was paid higher than low-skilled. Education was one of the main structure-forming factors. The university diploma was a filter for promotion in the official hierarchy. This, in turn, led to higher wages, as well as the share of privileges in obtaining additional social benefits.
Studies of social structure are now dominated by multidimensional stratification models using criteria such as property status and income, education, position in the power structure, social status and prestige, self-identification, i.e. a combination of objective and subjective criteria.
Some of the examples we have given are a reflection of the inequality that exists in society. Social inequality characterizes the position in relation to each other different people and their associations. Inequality existed in society at different stages of its development, but for each period there were also certain features and characteristics inherent in this particular era. People in society, as we know from history, were not equal in their position, there has always been a division into rich and poor, respected and despised, successful and unsuccessful.
The estate structure was more typical for the ancient and medieval society, which are usually called traditional. An estate is a group of people with certain rights and responsibilities that are inherited. Some of the estates had privileges - special rights that elevated these people and allowed them to live at the expense of others. So, in the Russian Empire, the nobility was the privileged class. And, on the contrary, the overwhelming majority of people in the country were deprived of even basic human rights. Serfs were the property of landowners, they could be sold and bought, and even parents separately from their children.
With the beginning industrial revolution the structure of society changed, classes appeared instead of estates. Class division is carried out, first of all, according to the place of people in economic system, in relation to property, according to the amount of income they receive. Belonging to a class is not inherited, the transition from one class to another is not regulated in any way, much depends on the person himself. In the 19th century, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat (wage workers) became the main classes in the leading countries of the world. It was then that the theory of K. Marx and F. Engels about the class division of society appeared. They believed that classes are always opposed to each other, are in a state of struggle, and this struggle between them is the driving force of history. At first, the opposing classes were slaves and slave owners, then the feudal lords and dependent peasants, and finally the workers and the bourgeoisie.
Modern social science interprets the concept of a class in a slightly different way. An important sign of class is considered to be a certain way of life, determined by the profession and the level of income. In the structure of society today, it is customary to distinguish three main classes:
The highest, which includes bankers, employers who own and control production, top managers who perform leading management functions;
Medium - white-collar workers and skilled workers, merchants with a certain income level;
The lowest - workers without special education, service personnel.
A special group also includes people working on the land - farmers, peasants. Of course, such a division is extremely arbitrary, and the real distribution of people into social groups is much more complicated.
In every society, in different historical periods, there were people who did not belong to the established groups and strata. They occupied, as it were, a borderline, intermediate position. Such a state in science is called marginal, and these people themselves are called marginal.
Marginal people are people who, for various reasons, have dropped out of their usual social environment and are unable to join new groups. For example, with the beginning of the industrial revolution in European countries and in Russia, some of the peasants were forced to move to cities, look for work there, and adapt to their new life. But not every peasant likes urban conditions, the rhythm of city life. The settlers feel like strangers in this new environment. In spirit and mind, they are still peasants living in a small village, with their own way of life.
Another example can be cited. Some representatives of the Russian intelligentsia, radically inclined and negatively related to the autocracy, state and public order Russian Empire, renounced their belonging to the ruling strata in society and declared about the transition to the position of an oppressed people. They proclaimed themselves to be the spokesmen for the interests of peasants and workers. The position of such people can also be called marginal.
Over time, the marginalized can form a new stable group of people. In the modern world, where the framework of social groups is very mobile and people can move from one to another, the emergence of marginal groups is an important source of change and development of the social structure.
Loading...