Social inequality, its main theories. Ideas about social stratification

Here Wright begins to modify the theory J. Remer and fixes three types of exploitation - exploitation based, respectively, on ownership of the means of production, on the organizational hierarchy and on the possession of qualification diplomas (the first, in his opinion, is more characteristic of capitalism, the second - for statism(state socialism), and three for (real) socialism). The last two types of exploitation, arising from the monopoly possession of organizational and qualification resources by modern managers and experts, according to Wright, are embodied in terms of their wages, which, in his opinion, are frankly rent-based. (We have, therefore, a creative replacement for the old Marxist theory of "productive and unproductive labor »).

Finally, Wright's borrowing in the heat of the polemical struggle becomes more and more obvious. Weberian issues and methodology. This is both a transition to the level of individual consciousness, and the importance of formal qualification for processes. class formation, and slips of the tongue about the role of career trajectories as a dynamic aspect of class positions. Many points of contact obviously played an important role in provoking burning discussion of Wright with neo-Weberians.

5. The life chances of social groups are determined not only by their current position in different markets, but are seen as the product of specific career opportunities. The prospects for social mobility become an internal factor in determining the position of different groups.

6. The most interesting and difficult moment is the analysis of status positions determined by the prestige of education and profession, lifestyle, sociocultural orientations and norms of behavior, as well as fixing their connection with market positions. Status groups are real communities that carry out collective action, as opposed to classes, which represent only a possible basis for joint action.

Conflict groups (classes) as subjects of ICA arise from the awareness by quasi-groups of their opposite int

Even a superficial look 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 features. Nature endowed one with musical abilities, the other with strength, the third with beauty, and prepared for someone 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 relationships between individuals. The strong force the weak, the cunning triumph over the simpletons. Inequality resulting from natural differences is the first form of inequality, in one form or another manifested in some species of animals. However, in human main is social inequality, inextricably linked with social differences, social differentiation.

Social those are called differences, which generated by social factors: lifestyle (urban and rural population), division of labor (manual and manual workers), social roles (father, doctor, politician), etc., which leads to differences in the degree of ownership of property, income, power, achievement , prestige, education.

The different levels of social development are basis for social inequality, the emergence of rich and poor, the stratification of society, its stratification (a stratum layer that includes people with the same income, power, education, prestige).

Income- the amount of cash receipts received by a person per unit of time. It may be labor, or it may be the possession of property that “works”.

Education- a complex of knowledge obtained in educational institutions. Its level is measured by the number of years of study. Let's say, incomplete secondary school - 9 years. The professor has more than 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 whom it applies.

Prestige- this is an assessment of the position of the individual in society, prevailing 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 trends interpret it differently. We single out the most interesting and noteworthy approaches.

Functionalism explains inequality based on the differentiation of social functions performed by different layers, classes, communities. The functioning and development of society is 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: some are engaged in the production of material goods, others create spiritual values, others manage, etc. For the normal functioning of society an optimal combination of all types of human activity is necessary. Some of them are more important, others less. So, on the basis of the hierarchy of social functions, a corresponding hierarchy of classes, layers is formed performing them. Those who carry out the general leadership and administration of the country are invariably placed at the top of the social ladder, for only they can support and ensure the unity of society, create the necessary conditions for the successful performance of other functions.

The explanation of social inequality by the principle of functional utility is fraught with a serious danger of a 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 as belonging to the highest stratum in the absence of his direct participation in management. That is why T. Parsons, considering the social hierarchy as a necessary factor that ensures 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 that have formed in society about the significance of each of them.

Observations of the actions and 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 an inequality of status, resulting 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 opportunities that allow a person to achieve one or another 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 to property, the distribution of material wealth. most brightly this approach appeared in Marxism. According to his version, the emergence of private property led to the social stratification of society, the formation 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 is 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 least at 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 greater 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 life support and development.

Secondly, inequality always perceived as unequal relations between people, groups. Therefore, it becomes natural to seek 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 widely used.

Inequality has many faces and manifests itself in various parts of a single social organism: in the family, in an institution, at an enterprise, in small and large social groups. It is necessary condition organization of 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 appearance of a leader in the team helps to unite it, turn it into a stable education, but at the same time it is accompanied by the provision leader of special rights.

Any, organization strive to save inequalities seeing in it ordering beginning, without which it is impossible reproduction of social ties and integration of the new. The same property belongs to society as a whole.

Ideas about social stratification

All societies known to history 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 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 leveling.

The concept of "stratification" came to sociology from geology, where they denote the location of the Earth's layers along a vertical line.

Under social stratification we will understand the vertical cut 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, and professional prestige.

In Russian, the analogue of this recognized concept is social stratification.

The basis of stratification is social differentiation - the process of emergence of functionally specialized institutions and 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, some social statuses and roles are inevitably 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, such as age, 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 every 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 poor and rich, educated and uneducated, enterprising and unenterprising, those in power and those without it. In this regard, the problem of the origin of social inequality, attitudes towards it and ways to eliminate it has always aroused increased interest, not only among thinkers and politicians, but also among ordinary people who consider social inequality as an injustice.

In the history of social thought, the inequality of people was explained in different ways: by the initial inequality of souls, divine providence, 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 of interests of various classes and social groups.

German sociologist R. Dahrendorf also believed that the economic and status inequality underlying the ongoing conflict of groups and classes and the struggle for the redistribution of power and status is formed as a result 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; the environment (natural and social), which objectively puts 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 the ruled and the managers.

American sociologist T. Pearson explained the existence of social inequality in every society by the presence of a hierarchical system of values. For example, in American society, success in business and career is considered the main social value, therefore, scientists of technological specialties, plant directors, etc., have a higher status and income, while in Europe the dominant value is “preservation of cultural patterns”, due to what 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 lose the incentive to engage in complex and laborious, dangerous or uninteresting activities, to improve their skills. 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 people, and so on.

The problem of social inequality is one of the most acute and topical in modern Russia. A feature of the social structure of Russian society 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. Strong social stratification, characteristic of modern Russian society, reproduces a system of inequality and injustice, in which the opportunities for self-realization in life and raising social status are limited for a fairly large part of the Russian population.

To an outsider, Alter Road in Detroit looks like an ordinary city street. However, locals call it the "Berlin Wall" or the "Mason-Dixon Line". This is due to the fact that Alter Road separates the eastern part of Detroit - the impoverished ghetto from the fashionable, wealthy suburb of Gross Point.

In The Wall Street Journal (1982), correspondent Amanda Bennett characterizes the communities living on both sides of Alter Road: "East Detroit is inhabited by the poor, mostly Negroes; Grosse Point is inhabited by the rich, all white. The premises of the schools where the children of the inhabitants study on the East Side of Detroit, guarded by cops Privileged kids from Gross Point take violin lessons, have their own computers For East Detroiters, "help" means survival; The differences are so striking that friends of Detroiters visiting from other places are shocked when they are shown along Alter Street.In the eastern part of the city there are abandoned car dumps, many burnt buildings, on the walls of which all kinds of inscriptions and drawings are scrawled. crowds of unoccupied people loiter in. At a distance of only a thousand feet, a different picture opens up - neatly trimmed hedges and painted shutters are reminiscent of another world, where there are lawn mowers, maids, two-car garages and charity events. As Democratic Senator John Kelly, representing both groups, says, on the one hand, here is "Western Beirut", on the other, the fabulous country of "Disneyland". /273/

The economic downturn in the early 1980s affected the two communities in different ways. Bennett writes: “Lifestyles are changing at all levels. On one side of the Alter Road, an unemployed man is forced to leave his tennis club. On the other side, an unemployed woman cannot afford to eat a hamburger. summer cottage, while in Detroit an underemployed prostitute raises the price of her services. In Detroit, poor, unemployed drunks drink one bottle at all.

The huge differences between these two groups clearly testify to the existence of "haves" and "have-nots". This situation is one of the most important problems that concern sociologists. They explore it by analyzing three variables: inequality, stratification, and class.

INEQUALITY, STRATIFICATION AND CLASS

A FEW EXAMPLES

IS INEQUALITY UNIVERSAL?

Religious leaders help to understand the meaning of life and death - they create a moral code that people follow in order to gain salvation. Since this function is very important, religious figures are usually rewarded more than ordinary members of society. It's not necessarily about financial rewards, because many members of the clergy or religious orders don't get that much money; social rewards are recognition and respect.

Management is another key social function. Rulers have much more power than those they rule. For the ruling stratum, increased power is a reward, but they often become owners of a larger share of wealth, their prestige is higher than that of mere mortals.

According to Davis and Moore, another leading area of ​​activity is technology. "Technicians" operate in special areas - for example, in the field of improving military and agricultural equipment. Since this type of activity requires long and careful preparation, society must provide technical specialists with large material benefits in order to stimulate the desire of people to make efforts in this direction (Davis, Moore, 1945).

THEORIES OF CONFLICT: DEFENDING THE PRIVILEGES OF POWER

Conflict theorists disagree with the notion that inequality is a natural way of ensuring society's survival. They not only point out the shortcomings /279/ of functionalist approaches (is it fair, for example, that soap merchants earn more than people who teach children to read?), but also argue that functionalism is nothing more than an attempt to justify the status quo. In their opinion, this is precisely the essence of inequality: it is the result of a situation where people who control social values ​​(mainly wealth and power) have the opportunity to benefit for themselves (Tumin, 1953).

Marx

Many ideas on the problem of social inequality are drawn from the Marxist theory of stratification and class. According to Marx, human history can be divided into periods depending on how the production of goods is carried out - he called this mode of production. During the period of feudalism, agriculture was the main mode of production: the nobleman owned the land, and his subjects cultivated it. During the capitalist period, business owners pay their workers, who use the money they earn to buy goods and services as they want and need.

The mode of production determines the economic organization of each formation. Marx considered economic organization to be the main aspect of social life. It includes technology, the division of labor and, most importantly, the relationships that develop between people in the production system. These relationships play a key role in the Marxist conception of classes.

Marx argued that in every type of economic organization there is a ruling class that owns and controls the means of production (factories, raw materials, etc.). Through economic power, the ruling class decides the fate of those who work for it. In a feudal society, the nobles exercise control over the serfs, in a capitalist society the bourgeoisie (owners of the means of production) over the proletariat (workers). To give an example from modern life: the bourgeois are the owners of factories and their equipment (means of production), while the proletariat is usually represented by people working on an assembly line. This division of society into classes is the basis of Marx's theory. Marx also argued that history is a sequence of changes in which one class system (eg feudalism) is transformed into another /280/ (eg capitalism). During the transformation at a new stage of development, some features of the previous stage are preserved. For example, in England during the period of capitalism, the aristocracy continued to own the land, this was the legacy of the feudal era. Marx also recognized that there is a division among the main classes - thus, within the bourgeoisie, shopkeepers and merchants differ in their position in the social hierarchy from the owners of the most important means of production (factories and land). Finally, Marx took into account the existence of a lumpen proletariat - criminals, drug addicts, etc., completely thrown out of society.

According to Marx, the essence of the relationship between the ruling and exploited classes is that the ruling class exploits the working class. The form of this exploitation depends on the mode of production. Under capitalism, property owners buy the labor of workers. It is the labor of workers from raw materials that creates a product. When this product is sold, the owners of the property make a profit, since it can be sold for more than the production itself costs. Marx stressed that surplus value is created by workers:

COST OF THE PRODUCT - the cost of technical equipment and raw materials + wages of workers + profit of the owner (surplus value).

Marx concluded that eventually the workers would realize that surplus value went into the pockets of the owners of the means of production, not their own. When they consider this, they will see that they are being exploited. This will lead to a deep, inevitable conflict between workers and owners. Marx predicted that as capitalism developed, the bourgeoisie would get richer and the proletariat poorer. The conflict will intensify, eventually the workers will make a revolution. The revolution will become global, which will lead to the overthrow of capitalism and the transition to socialism.

Marx's prediction did not come true, capitalism did not lead to the results he expected. First, there was a significant stratification within the proletariat. The service sector has grown noticeably in the economy; as wage earners, people in this area do not necessarily identify with the working class. Giorgiano Gagliani (1981) suggested that non-manual workers ("white collars"), from secretaries to engineers, are interested in an alliance with the capitalists: for political support, the owners pay them higher wages than manual workers. Marx's theory /281/ is also weakened by the fact that the government and the capitalists themselves have become more responsive to the needs and demands of the workers due to political pressure and thanks to the system of collective bargaining. Workers in the US have high wages and bonuses, in addition, they are paid unemployment benefits. For these reasons, they are hardly inspired by Marx's call: "The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They will gain the whole world. Proletarians of all countries, unite!"

Mikels

Other critics accepted the basic tenets of Marx's theory but questioned the idea that economic organization was the main cause of class conflict. In his study of the activities of trade unions and political parties in the late XIX - early XX century. Robert Michels proved that an oligarchy (the power of a few) is formed in any case if the size of the organization exceeds a certain value (say, increases from 1,000 to 10,000 people). This theory is called the "iron law of the oligarchy" (Mikels, 1959). The trend towards concentration of power is mainly due to the structure of the organization. A huge number of people who make up the organization cannot discuss the issue in order to start acting. They put the responsibility for it on a few leaders whose power is growing.

Dahrendorf

This "iron law" is characteristic of the organization of all social life, and not just the economy. Ralf Dahrendorf (1959) argues that class conflict is determined by the nature of power. It is not caused by economic relations between superiors and subordinates, rather, its main cause is the power of some over others. It is not only the power of the employers over the workers that creates the basis of the conflict; the latter can arise in any organization (hospital, military unit, university) where there are superiors and subordinates. /282/

WEBER'S THEORY: WEALTH-PRESTIGE-POWER

Max Weber, who wrote his scientific works a few decades after Marx (1922-1970), unlike him, did not consider the organization of the economy the basis of stratification. Weber identified three main components of inequality. He considered them interrelated and yet in essential respects independent. The first component is wealth inequality. Wealth means more than just wages; the rich often do not work at all, but earn large incomes from property, investments, real estate, or stocks and securities. Weber pointed out that representatives of different social classes - peasants, workers, merchants - have different opportunities for generating income and acquiring goods.

Status Achievement Research

Recently, the study of intergenerational mobility has given way to the study of status acquisition features. This is connected with the analysis of the social mobility of people during their life. Their mobility data is "read down" to reveal the factors that influence their current status. Thus, scientists have found that the most important factors that determine the status /293/ of a person are social and economic status, race, education, parental occupation, gender, family size, place

Table 9-3. Influence of race and gender on occupational status, 1984 (in %)

Occupation	Whites and others		Hispanics
Leading and highly qualified specialists
Technical specialists, sales and administrative workers
Service workers
Workers of the system for the production of precision instruments, products, repair specialists
Operators, assemblers, handymen
Experts in agriculture, forestry and fisheries

Inequality is a characteristic feature of any society. In its most general form, inequality means that people live in conditions in which they have unequal access to limited resources of material and spiritual consumption. Anthropologists argue that inequality already existed in primitive societies and was determined by dexterity and strength, courage or religious awareness, and so on. Inequality is generated even by natural differences between people, but it manifests itself most deeply as a consequence of social factors. As a result, some have more potential than others.

The sustainable reproduction of social inequality and the reasons for its existence are reflected in various theories of social inequality. Marxism finds an explanation primarily in the unequal attitude to the means of production, to property, which gives rise to other forms of inequality. Functionalism gives an interpretation based on the differentiation of functions performed by various groups in society. The significance of functions determines, respectively, the place and role of a particular individual and group, their position in society. The Russian philosopher N. Berdyaev considered inequality to be one of the fundamental characteristics of life, noting that every life system is hierarchical and has its own aristocracy. E. Durkheim in his work “On the division of social labor” explained inequality by the fact that different types of activity are valued differently in society. Accordingly, they form a certain hierarchy. In addition, people themselves have a different measure of talent and skill. Society must see to it that the most able and competent perform the most important functions.

Analysis of the vertical stratification of society is reflected in the theory of stratification. The very word "stratification" is borrowed from geologists. In English, it began to be understood as a layer, formation (in geology), a layer of society (in social science); stratum (stratification) - division into social strata ("layers"). This concept quite accurately conveys the content of social differentiation and implies that social groups line up in social space in a hierarchically organized vertically sequential series according to some dimension of inequality.

The basis of the modern approach to the study of social stratification was laid by Max Weber, who considered the social structure of society as a multidimensional system in which, along with classes and property relations, an important place belongs to status and power.

The American sociologist T. Parsons emphasizes that social hierarchy is determined by the cultural standards and values ​​that prevail in society. Therefore, in different societies, with the change of eras, the criteria that determine the status of an individual or group have changed.

If in primitive societies strength and dexterity were valued, then in medieval Europe the status of the clergy and aristocracy was high, for even an impoverished representative of a noble family was more respected in society than a wealthy merchant.

In bourgeois society, the status of a person began to be determined by the presence of capital, and it was he who opened the way up the social ladder. On the contrary, in Soviet society, wealth had to be hidden, while at the same time belonging to the Communist Party opened the way to a career.

social stratification can be defined as a structured system of social inequality in which individuals and social groups are ranked according to their social status in society.

Pitirim Sorokin is a classic for Western sociology author on the problems of stratification and mobility. He gives a classic definition of the concept of social stratification in his work “Social Stratification and Mobility”: “Social stratification is the differentiation of a given set of people (population) into classes in a hierarchical rank. It finds expression in the existence of higher and lower strata. Its basis and essence lies in the uneven distribution of rights and privileges, responsibilities and obligations, the presence or absence of social values, power and influence among members of a particular community. (P. Sorokin. Man. Civilization. Society. M., 1992, p. 302).

From the variety of social stratification, Sorokin singles out only three main forms: property inequality gives rise to economic differentiation, inequality in the possession of power indicates political differentiation, division according to the type of activity that differs in the level of prestige gives reason to speak of professional differentiation.

According to Sorokin, social mobility is the natural and normal state of society. It implies not only social movements of individuals, groups, but also social objects (values), that is, everything that is created or modified in the process of human activity. Horizontal mobility involves the transition from one social group to another, located at the same level of social stratification. By vertical mobility, he means the movement of an individual from one layer to another, and, depending on the direction of the movement itself, one can speak of two types of vertical mobility: upward and downward, i.e. about social ascent and social descent.

Vertical mobility, according to Sorokin, should be considered in three aspects, corresponding to the three forms of social stratification - as intraprofessional or interprofessional circulation, political movements and advancement along the "economic ladder". The main obstacle to social mobility in stratified societies is the presence of specific "sieves", which, as it were, sift through individuals, allowing some to move up, slowing down the progress of others. This "sieve" is the mechanism of social testing, selection and distribution of individuals across social strata. They, as a rule, coincide with the main channels of vertical mobility, i.e. school, army, church, professional, economic and political organizations. On the basis of rich empirical material, Sorokin concludes that in any society the social circulation of individuals and their distribution is not carried out by chance, but is in the nature of necessity and is strictly controlled by various institutions.

For many decades there has been a dispute between the stratification approach to the analysis of the social differentiation of society, put forward by M. Weber, and the class analysis of the Marxist tradition. It was K. Marx and M. Weber who laid the foundation for two main visions of social inequality, based on three criteria:

Wealth or wealth inequality;

the prestige

· power.

The same person or group, especially at times of profound social change, may occupy different places on these three parallels.

Various thinkers approached the consideration of the social class structure of society in different ways. Marxist sociology has contributed to the study of the concept of social class structure. Class is understood in two senses - broad and narrow.

In a broad sense, a class is understood as a large social group of people who own or do not own the means of production, occupying a certain place in the system of social division of labor and characterized by a specific way of earning income.

In a narrow sense, a class is any social stratum in modern society that differs from others in income, education, power and prestige. The second point of view prevails in foreign sociology and is beginning to be shared by the domestic one. In modern society, there are not two opposite, but several strata that pass into each other, called classes. According to the narrow interpretation, there were no classes under either slavery or feudalism. They appeared only under capitalism and mark the transition from a closed to an open society.

In closed caste and estate societies, social movements from lower to higher strata are completely prohibited or significantly limited. In open societies, movements from one stratum to another are not officially restricted in any way.

A socially stratified society with its numerous layers can be conditionally represented as a vertical structure with three levels-classes: the highest, the middle and the lowest.

The upper class usually makes up a small percentage of the population (no more than 10%). It can also be conditionally subdivided into the upper upper class (the richest, of noble origin) and the upper class (the rich, but not from the aristocracy). Its role in the life of society is ambiguous. On the one hand, he has powerful means of influencing political power. On the other hand, its interests, the main of which are the preservation and increase of accumulated property, constantly clash with the interests of the rest of society. While not possessing sufficient numbers, the upper class is not a guarantor of the sustainability and stability of society.

According to the universal recognition of sociologists, confirmed by life, the central place in the social structure of modern society is occupied by the middle class. In almost all developed countries, the share of the middle class is 55-60%. In countries where, for various reasons, the middle class has not taken shape, there is socio-economic and political instability, and the process of modernizing society is significantly hampered.

We can distinguish the main signs of belonging to the middle class:

the presence of property in the form of accumulated property or existing as a source of income;

· a high level of education (higher or specialized secondary), which is characterized as intellectual property;

income that fluctuates around the national average;

professional activity that has a fairly high prestige in society.

At the bottom of the social ladder is the lower class - those categories of the population that do not own property are engaged in low-skilled labor with an income that determines their position on the verge of poverty or below. This also includes groups that do not have a permanent income, the unemployed, declassed elements.

The very position of these layers determines their position as unstable. Usually it is these strata that become the social base of radical and extremist parties.

According to the accepted by Academician T.I. Zaslavskaya hypothesis, Russian society consists of four social strata: upper, middle, basic and lower, as well as a desocialized “social bottom”. The top stratum is the real ruling stratum, acting as the main subject of the reforms.

It includes elite and sub-elite groups that occupy the most important positions in the system of state administration, in economic and law enforcement agencies. They are united by the fact of being in power and the ability to directly influence the reform process.

1 . Economic and socio-political development of Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. Russia at the beginning of the 20th century was a country with an average level of development of capitalism. The abolition of serfdom in 1861, the reforms of the 60-70s. did not pass without a trace: capitalist industry grew at a high rate, new industries and new industrial regions arose. Important changes took place in transport: railways connected the Center with the outskirts and accelerated the economic development of the country. During the crisis years of 1900-1903. the process of creating large industrial monopolies - cartels and syndicates - "Prodamet", "Prodvagon", "Produgol" and others has accelerated. Significant changes have also taken place in the field of banking and finance. Large banks closely associated with industry arose. The financial system after the reform carried out in 1897 by Minister of Finance S. Yu. Witte (the introduction of gold backing of the ruble and the free exchange of paper money for gold) was one of the most stable in the world. Russia is among the five most developed industrial countries. She embarked on the path of eliminating the remnants of serfdom, developing industry, and creating the foundations of an industrial society. Modernization in Russia had its own peculiarities: - it was necessary to catch up with the industrial powers that had pulled ahead; The government has a huge influence on economic growth. State orders, high customs duties, maintenance of factories, factories, railways at the expense of the treasury were called upon to support and accelerate the development of industry; - Foreign capital played a significant role in financing industrial growth. The task of modernization was the challenge that time itself threw to Russia. Its solution was fraught with difficult, even grave problems.

Labor productivity was low. In terms of the level of industrial production and technical equipment of enterprises, Russia lagged far behind the leading industrial countries.
Acquired extreme sharpness at the beginning of the 20th century. agricultural issue. Most of the landowners lived in the old fashioned way: they leased the land to the peasants on a semi-enslaved lease, and they worked it with their own primitive implements. The peasantry suffered from lack of land, remnants of serfdom, remained committed to the communal values ​​of collectivism and equality. The peasants dreamed of a "black redistribution", the division of the landlords' land between the community members. At the same time, there was no equality among the peasantry; the stratification of the countryside into the poor, the middle peasants and the kulaks had gone quite far.
The position of the working class at the beginning of the 20th century. was heavy. Long working hours, poor living conditions, low wages, combined with a sophisticated system of fines, lack of rights - these are the reasons that caused discontent among the workers.
By the beginning of the century, modernization had practically not affected the political sphere. There were no changes in the system of central authorities. Russia remained an absolute monarchy.

SOCIAL STRATIFICATION

Representatives of the human race appear before us in all the variety of properties - biological, psychological and social, which already creates certain prerequisites for the existence of inequality. In itself, inequality has existed for a long time and objectively, and it is the most characteristic feature of human society.

We are primarily interested in the problem social inequality.

This problem for many centuries excited the minds of people (and, above all, from the point of view of social justice); an atmosphere was formed around it for manifestations of mass riots, social movements and even revolutions. But all attempts to eliminate this inequality led to the fact that on the basis of one destroyed inequality, a new one was invariably created, based on other signs. At the same time, people with great persistence resisted the formation of complete social equality.

Social inequality – this is a specific form of social differentiation, in which individual individuals, social groups, strata, classes are at different levels of the social hierarchy, and at the same time have unequal life chances and opportunities to meet their needs .

Social differentiation(from lat. differentia - difference, difference) - a broader concept, meaning the difference between individuals or groups on many grounds.

Social inequality manifests itself as a result of complex processes of the division of labor and the corresponding social stratification, it may be associated with the concentration of a number of life advantages in certain individuals or groups, and may even lead to deprivation of the rest of the population (a condition in which people feel their disadvantage, lack what they need). At the same time, inequality relations can have one or another degree of rigidity of their consolidation in special social institutions and the corresponding regulatory framework.

On the one hand, as practice has shown, social inequality is objectively necessary for society (for more efficient development). On the other hand, when the majority of the population finds itself on the threshold (or beyond the threshold) of poverty and, in fact, does not have the opportunity for its development, this can lead to the destruction and even death of society. Where should be that line, that measure of social inequality, which is capable of ensuring social development?

As a global philosophical problem, the problem of inequality has worried thinkers since antiquity. Scientists and public figures in their attempts to comprehend it, first of all, asked themselves questions about what can be considered a source of social inequality, and how this inequality should be regarded.

Within the framework of sociology, the explanation of the causes of inequality is reflected in two directions:

· FUNCTIONALISM- differentiation of functions performed by groups, and the existence of various types of activities that are differently valued in society.

· MARXISM- Unequal attitude to property, to the means of production.

The first model of social inequality was created M. Weber, who explained the nature of inequality using three criteria (generators of inequality): wealth(income, property ownership), prestige(the authority of a person, determined by his professional activity, level of education), power(the ability to pursue policies and influence social processes). It is these criteria that are involved in the vertical stratification of society, creating a hierarchy.

Indeed, they are the types of public goods that are most important to people. Wealth necessary not only to meet elementary, universal vital needs, but also due to the culture of consumption (you can buy almost everything!). Possession power gives people a sense of strength, advantages over others, as well as the opportunity to receive great material benefits. Prestige causes respect from the environment and allows a person to establish himself in his own importance, increase self-esteem. At the same time, it is easy to see that all three criteria are often conjugated.

The idea of ​​the nature of social inequality was subsequently developed by P. Sorokin, who created harmonious theories of social stratification (stratum - layer) and social mobility. Here he is already talking about the existence of not one, but several "social spaces", structured in a certain way: economic, political And professional. At the same time, he notes that an individual can occupy different positions (statuses) in different social spaces, i.e., for example, having a high economic status (wealth), may have a rather low official status.

This theory was further developed in the framework of functionalism and in particular, T. Parsons explains the hierarchical structure of society by the value system that exists in it, which forms an understanding of the significance of a particular function performed. In different societies and in different eras, different criteria could be significant: in primitive societies strength and dexterity were valued, in medieval Europe the status of the clergy and aristocracy was high, in bourgeois society the status began to be determined mainly by capital, etc.

The modern most influential theory of social stratification developed within the framework of functionalism is the theory K. Davis and W. Moore, in which inequality and status distribution in society is justified by the functional significance of statuses. In order to ensure social order, the requirements for the performance of roles corresponding to statuses are defined here, and it is also proposed to allocate difficult to fill, but socially significant statuses for which society should develop higher rewards.

A certain contribution to understanding the nature of inequality was made by Marxism and, above all, by K. Marx, who created the theory of the class construction of society, where the class itself was considered as a large social group. Class relations, according to Marx, are of a conflict nature, since they are caused by the appropriation of one of the classes - property, resources, surplus value. He builds a fairly coherent theory of socio-economic formations, where he shows that at different times there were different types of property (slaves, land, capital). At the same time, he assesses the conflict in a positive way - as a source of social development.

In sociology, the analysis of the vertical stratification of society is reflected in the development of two classical theories:

1) theories of social stratification (functionalism)

2) the theory of the class construction of society (Marxism).

Theory of social stratification. Its author is P. Sorokin.

social stratification – it is a hierarchically organized structure of social inequality in society.

In his work "Social stratification and mobility" (Man. Civilization. Society. - M., 1992, p. 302), P. Sorokin offers the following definition social stratification – this is the differentiation of a certain set of people into classes in a hierarchical rank, which finds expression in the existence of higher and lower strata. Its essence lies in the unequal distribution of rights and privileges, duties and responsibilities, the presence or absence of power and influence among members of the community. Those. the upper strata (a minority of the population) have more resources and opportunities to satisfy their interests and needs.

Sorokin points out that there can be three main forms of stratification in a society:

Ø ECONOMIC- generated by property inequality.

Ø POLITICAL- due to inequality in the possession of power.

Ø PROFESSIONAL- associated with the division by type of activity and its prestige.

Based on the theory of social stratification, P. Sorokin develops his second theory social mobility, by which he means "any transition of an individual, social object or value created or modified through activity, from one social position to another."

social mobility – it is the movement of an individual or group in a system of social hierarchy.

Sorokin highlights:

Ø horizontal mobility, in which the movement occurs from one position to another, but lying on the same level (transition to another family, to another faith, moving to another city). Those. status remains the same.

Ø vertical mobility- with the transition of an individual or group from one social stratum to another (with a change in status), within which there may exist:

- ascending And

- descending social mobility.

Channels of social mobility for an individual in an open society can be:

Ø School (educational institutions)

Ø Church

Ø Trade unions

Ø Economic structures

Ø Political organizations

Path accessibility for social mobility is defined as characteristics of society, and ability of the individual.

The main obstacle to social mobility in stratified societies are specific "sieves", as a mechanism of social testing, through which selection and provision of opportunities for people to move vertically are carried out.

If we are talking about the individual abilities of an individual, then subjective obstacles may arise in his way - in the form of some socio-cultural barrier. A new status level may require the individual to master certain status features (a new material standard of living, the assimilation of typical status behavior, a change in one's social environment).

Vertical mobility can serve as an indicator of the openness of a society. Depending on the characteristics of society, as far as vertical movements are possible in them, they distinguish:

- closed societies, these include those where movement from the lower to the higher layers is prohibited or significantly hindered. This should include societies with such historical types of social stratification as: slavery, castes, estates;

- open societies(with class or stratification division), where movements from one stratum to another are not officially restricted.

It should be noted that in modern societies, where they are largely interested in ensuring vertical mobility, in qualified and competent performers, in updating the intellectual elite, nevertheless, even in them there are social groups of a “closed” type (elite), getting into which can be extremely difficult.

The theory of class construction of society. The author is K. Marx.

Another approach to structuring society is its class construction. The first picture of the class construction of society was developed by K. Marx, who considered classes as large and conflict social groups divided along economic lines.

As part of Marxist approach

- Class- this is a large social group of people whose position in society (in the system of division of labor) is determined by their attitude to property, to the means of production, and also by the method of obtaining income

It should be noted that Marx's predictions on the establishment of a communist system on a global scale as a result of the class struggle (as the highest stage of primitive society) did not come true. At the heart of the communist ideology was the principle of material equality (while maintaining other types of inequality), which supposedly was supposed to create the basis for ensuring social justice.

But ... on the one hand, in particular - in our country, the so-called. "equalization" led to a sharp decrease in labor motivation and economic recession, which required the strengthening of state power. And on the other hand, rich people invariably began to appear, only in the conditions of the growth of the shadow economy, which, in part, turned out to be merged with the authorities. The prestige of mental labor turned out to be associated with the fact that the intelligentsia was not even awarded its own definition as a class, but only a layer between the class of workers and peasants.

Mankind preferred to follow a different path, preserving social inequality itself, but ensuring a greater degree of it. justice and at the same time - sustainability society itself.

In foreign practice, this issue began to be resolved with the help of the formation of the so-called middle class, quite numerous, having a high level of education, having a stable economic situation and prestigious professions. The very idea of ​​the importance of the middle class was put forward by one of the classics of sociology - G. Simmel, and to this day is successfully working in society.

Within the framework of the concept of the rule of law, in particular, an approach was formulated to create a more equitable social inequality - providing people with equal starting opportunities so that the most deserving ones reach the finish line. Moreover, on this basis, the concept welfare state, to better ensure the principle of social justice.

At present, class theories are already tilting towards social stratification, i.e. in addition to remaining as the main feature - property, the basic class differences also include: official status (power), prestige. And the class itself is seen as an enlarged social status that has its own subculture and privileges.

In a modern interpretation Class - is a group of people who identify themselves with a certain position in the system of social hierarchy.

The position of an individual or group in the system of social stratification is determined by such concepts as:

§ social status - this is the relative position of an individual or group in the social structure of society, determined by some social characteristics;

§ social role - behavior expected from a person occupying a certain status and implemented through a system of norms.

Each person can have a whole set of such statuses (with different ranks in different areas).

The status is determined by the following parameters :

· responsibilities

functions

Statuses can be classified:

According to the degree of formalization

Ø formalized – (depending on the degree of formalization of the social system) - Doctor of Science, accountant;

Ø informal - the captain of the yard football team, the most popular singer.

Purchasing form.

Ø prescribed (obtained at birth) - citizenship, nationality, social origin ...

Ø achieved - profession, rank, academic degree ...

Allocate also main (integral) status - it is often due to the professional activities of a person (president, plant director)

The social structure of modern Western society can be represented as follows:

High class (10%)

Middle class (60-70%)

Lower class (20-30%)

Top class not numerous, and its role in the life of society is ambiguous. On the one hand, he has powerful means of influencing political power, and on the other hand, his interests (preserving and increasing wealth and power) begin to go beyond public interests. Therefore, it cannot serve as a guarantor of the stability of society.

lower class, as a rule, has small incomes, not very prestigious professions, a low level of education and little power. His forces are aimed at survival and maintaining his position, so he is also not able to ensure social stability.

And finally middle class.He is not only the most numerous, but also has the stability of his position, which he will strive to maintain in the future. It is his interests that largely coincide with the public interest.

Signs belonging to the middle class are the following:

The presence of property (as property or as a source of income)

High level of education (intellectual property)

Income (in the amount of the national average)

Professional activity (having high prestige)

In modern Russian society, attempts were also made to build social stratification, although it is rather difficult to do this in a transitional society, since the strata themselves, the classes themselves, have not yet settled down.

It should be noted that the construction of social stratification is in itself a laborious task, since it is associated with difficulties in determining the criteria for this division, their significance, and also assigning people to one or another stratum. It requires the collection of statistical data, the conduct of social surveys, the analysis of the economic, political and social processes taking place in society. But at the same time, social stratification is extremely necessary - without it it is difficult to carry out social transformations, build public policy and, in general, ensure the stability of society.

One of these models is the social structure of modern Russian society (proposed by T.I. Zaslavskaya).

1. Upper layer (elite - 7%)

2. Middle layer (20%)

3. Base layer (61%)

4. Bottom layer (7%)

5. Social bottom (5%)

It should be noted that Zaslavskaya does not use the concept of a class, but only a “layer”, thereby showing the unformedness of classes.

Upper layer- elite and sub-elite, they occupy important positions in the system of state administration, in economic and power structures. They are united by the fact of being in power and the ability to directly influence the reform process. In fact, this is the main subject of Russian reforms.

middle layer- the embryo of the middle class in the Western sense, since its representatives still do not have enough capital to ensure the stability of their position, nor the level of professionalism, nor prestige. This includes entrepreneurs of medium business, managers of small enterprises, the middle link of the bureaucracy, senior officers, the most qualified specialists.

base layer- most of the intelligentsia (specialists), employees, technical personnel, workers of mass professions, and the peasantry get here. With all the difference in their statuses and mentality, they are united by the desire to adapt to changing conditions and survive and, if possible, maintain their status.

The lowest layer characterized by a rather low activity potential and poor adaptation to changing conditions. These are not very healthy and strong people, often elderly, pensioners, unemployed, refugees, etc. They are united by a very low level of income, education, unskilled labor and / or lack of permanent work.

Main Feature social bottom and the difference from the lower layer is isolation from the institutions of society, involvement in criminal and semi-criminal institutions (alcoholics, drug addicts, homeless people ...)

In modern Russian society, social polarization continues to develop on the basis of property and other types of stratification, which creates serious threats to maintaining the integrity of society. The most topical is the problem of income inequality: the so-called decile coefficient (the ratio of the incomes of the richest 10% to the incomes of the poorest 10%) is approaching 17, while, according to world practice, its excess of 10 can give rise to social unrest. And even in the oil and gas industry, which is relatively prosperous in terms of earnings, according to Forbes experts, the difference in the income level of top managers of Rosneft and Gazprom and the minimum wage rate for a worker of the 1st category is 8 thousand times.

In later years, a certain contribution to understanding the problem of social inequality from the point of view of social justice was made by the American scientist P. Blau, who proposed to use the system of parameters he developed, related to both the individual and the social group: nominal and rank parameters.

TO nominal The parameters included: gender, race, ethnicity, religion, language, place of residence, area of ​​activity, political orientation. They characterize social differentiation and do not provide for ranking to a higher or lower position in society. If this happens, then it should be judged from the point of view of injustice and oppression.

TO ranking parameters: education, prestige, power, wealth (inheritance or accumulation), income (salary), origin, age, administrative position, intelligence. They are the ones who assume ranging and reflect social inequality.