Introduction
Social stratification has been an integral aspect of society for centuries. Factors for social stratification differ by country and the stage of the society’s development. Social stratification inevitably leads to inequality due to division into social classes. Moreover, the aspects of racial and gender inequality should be considered (Keister and Southgate 2012). Among many forms of inequality, contemporary sociology focuses on three main types such as economic, social, and political. This approach was introduced by Max Weber, a German sociologist and philosopher. Thus, his ideas are still applicable to the contemporary social science. This paper reviews the issue of social stratification, its factors, and the contemporary application of Weber’s theory.
Defining Social Stratification
Social stratification is typical of any society. Doob (2016:2) defines social stratification as “a deeply embedded hierarchy providing different groups varied rewards, resources, and privileges and establishing structures and relationships that both determine and legitimate those outcomes.” In every society, people get used to traditional stratification and consider it to be a normal state of things. As a rule, stratification means inequality. In the contemporary world, there are discrepancies in income, wealth, possessions, prestige, status, power, availability of education and healthcare, and other aspects (Rothman 2016). The major present-day inequalities were defined already in the 19th century and comprise economic, social, and political inequalities.
Economic inequalities are commonly related to material resources and wealth. Further stratification results from these aspects. Thus, people with low income usually have poor access to educational opportunities, which can guarantee a well-paid job and provide a successful career development. Also, they cannot afford health insurance and thus do not have access to high-quality care, which results in health disparities. At the same time, another group of society members makes use of the benefits provided by their prosperity. For example, some entrepreneurs, corporate executives, professional athletes, and some other categories earn millions (Rothman 2016).
Social status inequality can be explained as “the social standing, esteem, respect, or prestige that people command from other members of society” (Rothman 2016:3). It presupposes judging the members of a society by the fact of their inferiority or superiority. Social status has several determinants. First of all, it can be achieved as a result of a person’s efforts or personal attributes. Secondly, a status can accompany the selected occupation, belonging to a certain social class, or being a representative of this or that race or ethnic group (Rothman 2016). For example, lawyers, scientists, or doctors are traditionally higher in the social hierarchy than garbage collectors.
Finally, the inequality related to power and authority is the third result of social stratification. This category lacks exact definition, but it is accepted that “the essence of power is the ability to control events or to determine the behavior of others in the face of resistance, and to resist attempts at control by others” (Rothman 2016:4). Authority is frequently grounded in tradition and can be an attribute of a certain position in an organization. For example, executive officers in companies have more authority than the workers, or in the armed forces, generals have authority over lieutenants.
Max Weber’s Theory of Stratification in Society
Max Weber is known for his contribution to the social sciences. His treatments of status, ethics, class, bureaucracy, ethnicity, and politics are still used by social scientists (Waters and Waters 2015). His Theory of Social Stratification comprises such aspects as class, social status, and political party. Social class has an economic background and is usually based on the relationship of a person to the market. In this respect, Weberian treatment of class is similar to that of Marx, who determined such categories as propertied and propertyless (Rothman 2016). However, Weber singled out three types of market situation which determine class stratification. Thus, labor market introduces the categories of employees and employers; the money market involves creditors and debtors; and the commodity market implies such categories as landlords and tenants, or buyers and sellers (Rothman 2016). Therefore, participation in these three markets determines division into three economic classes. According to Weber (as cited in Rothman 2016:36), “classes are groups of people who share a common market situation,” which also determines opportunities of a person. The concept of status, on the contrary, is not related to any economic qualities. Instead of that, it comprises honor, prestige, and religion as decisive factors. Weber introduced a term of “status honor” as one of the forms of inequality, which is grounded in beliefs and values of the society. Weber admitted that frequently people with powerful economic resources have the highest status.
Moreover, the category of status implies a division of society into “status groups” thus forming a certain hierarchy (Rothman 2016). It should be mentioned that every status group has different prestige. Weber’s explanation of status groups is one of his valuable contributions to the theory of social stratification. Thus, he stated that representatives of leading status groups acknowledge their shared interests and tend to preserve the advantages of their position both for themselves and their children. Finally, the concept of a party is determined by belonging to a certain political group and is related to power. The term introduced by Weber predetermines the contemporary notion of a political party. According to Weber (as cited in Rothman 2016:36), parties are groups whose “action is oriented toward a goal which is striven for in a planned manner.” Therefore, different associations and organizations not involved in politics are also included in the Weberian definition of parties. Weber also speaks about the possibilities given to people to improve their lives, which he calls life chances. It should also be mentioned that Weber and his followers strictly differentiate between the concepts of status and class while other social sciences consider these notions interchangeable. While Weber’s theory is not new, it is considered to be a cornerstone for the contemporary social science in the aspect of social stratification. Moreover, apart from multiple forms of inequality, Weber contributed to the development of such issues as bureaucracy, patriarchy, religion, and capitalism, which are known as the Weberian legacy.
Contemporary Reading of Weber’s Theory
Social stratification is typical of any society. For example, while stratification in Western societies is mainly grounded in the socioeconomic status, smaller societies or groups are stratified on the basis of age, belonging to a tribe or cast (Cole 2017). Nevertheless, any stratification means an unequal distribution of power or resources. The current state of things in the aspect of social stratification resembles Max Weber’s theory, which is relevant to the issues of the twenty-first century. It can be explained by the fact that the concepts of social stratification, such as power, politics, class, and status are as significant at present as they were a century ago. His writings look contemporary because they treat issues similar to those which currently bother the society. For example, the political institutions described by Weber in 1918–1919, both national and international, still have a significant impact on the society and “continue to shape humans in the same fashion they did” at Weber’s time (Waters and Waters 2015:2).
Weber’s sociology is grounded in the definition of Gemeinschaft. He describes this concept as “the most basic and enduring social structure that is “society” (Waters and Waters 2015:34). Gemeinschaft is related to the issues of preserving such important notions as honor and prestige. These concepts also determine a social identity in the aspect of who is “us” and who is “them.” Weber considered these Gemeinschaft concepts to be historically based and continues. He associated Gemeinschaft concepts with the notions of “peasantry, aristocracy, nation, professions, ethnic groups, clans, tribes, and … the marital pair or any range of other groups whose basic membership is rooted in beliefs about birth, ritual, and/or education, rather than a pure naked position in the marketplace” (Waters and Waters 2015:3). Nevertheless, Weber also agrees that Gemeinschaft can have a recent origin. Thus, new countries appear in the world, and their societies also follow certain stratification principles.
There are many contemporary examples of Weber’s theory application in the modern world. Thus, people tend to share their statuses in the society and recognize each other as “us,” opposing to “them,” those who have another status and do not belong to the group. Therefore, they usually have respect for the rights, privileges, and responsibilities of other members of the same group and can be intolerant to similar rights and privileges of the representatives of different groups. Nevertheless, Weber did not treat Gemeinschaft as a vacuum (Waters and Waters 2015). The same can be attributed to the present-day society: representatives of one class are not totally isolated and have to interact with other classes and groups.
Another aspect analyzed by Weber and relevant to the present-day society stratification includes ethnic segregation and ‘caste’ (Grusky 2014). Thus, Weber claimed that a status groups could become a closed ‘caste.’ It is likely to have its rituals in addition to status distinctions determined by conventions. In the contemporary society, Weber’s idea of ‘caste’ is represented by the existence of diverse VIP communities which unite individuals of certain interests and high income. According to Weber, caste structure “brings about a social subordination and an acknowledgement of ‘more honor’ in favor of the privileged caste and status groups” (Grusky 2014:120). Another example of ‘caste’ grounded not in wealth but in power is the group of political leaders in some developing countries, where the parliament members and other individuals involved in politics consider themselves a selected caste and use their positions for personal needs.
Finally, Weber introduced the notion of life chances, which is frequently used nowadays. The researcher relates this issue to “the role of social class in enhancing or weakening the probability of enjoying experiences that enhance the quality of life or facing barriers that diminish it” (Rothman 2016:4). In the present-day interpretation, life chances are predetermined not only by belonging to a social class, but also by gender, ethnicity and race become decisive factors. Life chances are not only related to opportunities for education or career. They also include the probability of infants’ survival, the risk of developing some diseases (including mental conditions, HIV/AIDS, obesity, depression, etc.), odds of becoming a criminal or a victim, and other variants of life development. For example, the research proves that the risk of becoming a victim of violence depends on income, gender, and race (Rothman 2016). Thus, women in low-income households are seven times more likely to be a victim than those with high income and Black females are more frequently hurt than White or Latino. Therefore, it can be concluded that Weber’s theory has many applications in the contemporary society and his ideas are still relevant.
Conclusion
On the whole, the issue of social stratification is not new. The division of society was provided since the society itself appeared. The attempts of socialistic governments to create societies of equals did not succeed. In fact, a society without stratifications seems to be a utopia. Even democratic societies, which claim the equality of the citizens, are stratified and this stratification provides grounds for their existence. However, the concepts, which are now used to define stratification and inequality, were formulated by Max Weber. It is interesting that more than a century after Weber’s writings were created, many of the ideas are applicable for the analysis of the contemporary society. Thus, the concepts of class, social status, and political party developed by Weber became a basis for the present-day social stratification. Certainly, contemporary stratification includes other concepts, such as gender, race, ethnicity, and age. Together with Weber’s ideas, today’s social; scientists have powerful tools to analyze social stratification, its roots, tendencies, and consequences.
References
Cole, Nicli Lisa. 2017. “What Is Social Stratification, and Why Does It Matter? How Sociologists Define and Study This Phenomenon.” Web.
Doob, Christopher B. 2016. Social Inequality and Social Stratification in U.S. Society. New York, NY: Routledge.
Grusky, David B. 2014. Social Stratification. Class, Race, and Gender in Sociological Perspective 4th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Avalon Publishing.
Keister, Lisa A., and Darby E. Southgate. 2012. Inequality: A Contemporary Approach to Race, Class, and Gender. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Rothman, Robert A. 2016. Inequality and Stratification. Race, Class, and Gender. 5th ed. New York, NY: Routledge.
Waters, Tony, and Dagmar Waters. 2015. Weber’s Rationalism and Modern Society. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.