What is human inequality? Social inequality in modern Russia. Modern types of inequality

Social inequality is a state of affairs in a society or individual community when its members have unequal access to social benefits such as wealth, power and prestige.

Any society is always structured on many grounds - national, social class, demographic, settlement, etc. Structuring, that is, people belonging to certain social, professional, socio-demographic groups, can give rise to social inequality. Even natural genetic or physical differences between people can form the basis for the formation of unequal relationships! But the main thing in society is those differences, those objective factors that give rise to social inequality among people. Inequality is an enduring fact of every society. Ralf Dahrendorf wrote: “Even in a prosperous society, the unequal status of people remains an important enduring phenomenon... Of course, these differences are no longer based on direct violence and legal norms on which the system of privileges in a caste or class society was based. However, in addition to more gross divisions according to the size of property and income, prestige and power, our society is characterized by many differences of rank - so subtle and at the same time so deeply rooted that claims about the disappearance of all forms inequalities as a result of equalizing processes can be perceived, at least, with skepticism."

Social are those differences that are generated by social factors: division of labor, way of life life, social roles performed by individuals or social groups.

A structured society can be represented as a set of interconnected and interdependent areas social life: economic, political, spiritual, social, in which the family and household sphere is sometimes distinguished. Each of these spheres of social life has its own social stratification, its own structure. Social differences between people determine social structure. It manifests itself first of all economic structure society. The main elements of this structure are classes, social and professional groups, strata.

The largest social stratification formation in society is class. We should not forget K. Marx's thesis about the fundamental importance of social classes in the history of human society.

The word "class" comes from ancient Rome, where it was used to divide the population into separate groups for tax purposes. At the top level were the Assidia - the richest Romans, at the bottom - the proletarians.

Plato in Ancient Greece saw two classes - rich and poor. Aristotle divided society into a greedy upper class, a lower class of slaves, and a respectable middle class, which could be trusted to care for the common good because it possessed moderate virtues and vices.

The scientific concept of class appeared in the 19th century. Its author is K. Marx. He saw the entire history of society in the conflict of classes. Hence the idea of a classless society, a society of complete social integration, social equality. K. Marx divided his contemporary society into two main classes, primarily in relation to private property. Following his logic, we can assume that the socialist system ensures complete social equality, because property has become a national property, or state property, to which all members of society, all social groups must have an equal attitude. However, it was precisely on the basis of public property that the nomenklatura, privileges flourished, and the shadow economy emerged. Why did the socialist experiment end in failure?

Firstly, in any society, in addition to owning property, someone must exercise operational economic control over it. The ability to distribute material and monetary Resources often turns out to be more important and beneficial than a direct loss of property. In this option, the manager has the advantage of irresponsibility, because he is dealing with someone else's property. Thus, if an army of officials has poor management, the risk is small, but the social benefits are obvious.

Secondly, society always has a certain state, political organization, which means that leaders, government managers, and officials appear who, objectively, must have more rights, otherwise they simply will not be able to perform the functions of public administration. In almost any society, such social groups occupy a certain status which objectively gives rise to social inequality.

Written story humanity does not yet know a single society without social inequalities. Social inequality has many faces, it manifests itself in a wide variety of forms and at different levels of social organization. Surveys show: people have a fairly good idea of their place in the social hierarchy; they acutely feel and react painfully to social inequality, which is often expressed in social conflicts.

Thirdly, there is reason to believe that human nature has a genetically inherent desire to dominate other people. This desire is expressed to varying degrees among individuals. A person or a social group, having received power, always tries to use it openly or covertly. These processes can be regulated (representative democracy, separation of powers, rotation of government officials), but cannot be completely eliminated.

Fourthly, society is objectively interested in nominating the most capable and gifted people for management, at the top of power, and thus is forced to create conditions so that people strive and have the desire to occupy these places. Social inequality is a kind of instrument of self-preservation of society, with the help of which it deliberately ensures that the most important positions are filled by capable and qualified people, a kind of elite - political, economic, scientific, military, etc. The mistakes of such people or their incompetence can be very costly to society. Therefore, it is necessary to create some advantages in social status, social position, stimulating the promotion of the most capable people.

Fundamental theoretical basis social inequalities, stratification is the very development of civilization. Each individual person cannot master all the achievements of material and spiritual culture. Specialization of people arises and, along with it, more and less valuable activities. People are equal in their abilities, upbringing and education. This is the objective basis of stratification.

Causes social inequalities.
Functionalism:

When a certain type of activity or profession is valued more in a society, a hierarchy in society is built depending on the importance of these professions.
People have different abilities, the most talented are engaged in the most prestigious professions, the talented should occupy the top of the social pyramid.
According to Marx:

Social inequality is based on economic inequality.
Those who own property oppress those who do not own it.
According to Weber. At the core social inequalities lie:

Wealth
Power
Prestige
According to Sorokin. Reason social inequalities are:

Own
Power
Profession
Forms social inequalities:
Biosocial
Sexual
Ethnic
National
Gender

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, level of intelligence and many other characteristics. Nature endowed one with musical abilities, another with strength, a third with beauty, and for someone she prepared the fate of a frail and disabled person. 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 prevail over the simpletons. Inequality arising from natural differences is the first form of inequality, which appears in one form or another in some animal species. However, in the main human thing is social inequality, inextricably linked with social differences, social differentiation.

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

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

Income- the amount of cash receipts received by an individual per unit of time. This may be labor, or it may be the ownership of property that “works.”

Education— a set of knowledge acquired in educational institutions. Its level is measured by the number of years of education. Let's say incomplete high 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 wishes. It is measured by the number of people to whom it applies.

Prestige- this is an assessment of the position of an individual in society, established 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 differently. Let us highlight the most interesting and noteworthy approaches.

Functionalism explains inequality based on the differentiation of social functions, performed by various layers, classes, communities. The functioning and development of society are possible only thanks to the division of labor, when each social group solves the corresponding tasks that are vital 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. So, based on the hierarchy of social functions, a corresponding hierarchy of classes and layers is formed executing them. Those who exercise general leadership and management of the country are invariably placed at the top of the social ladder, because only they can support and ensure the unity of society and 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 subjectivist interpretation. Indeed, why is this or that function considered more significant if society as an integral organism cannot exist without functional diversity? This approach does not allow us to explain such realities as the recognition of an individual as belonging to a higher stratum in the absence of his direct participation in management. That is why T. Parsons, considering social hierarchy as a necessary factor ensuring the viability of a social system, links its configuration with the system of dominant values in society. In his understanding, the location of social layers on the hierarchical ladder is determined by the ideas formed in society about the importance 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. - this is inequality of status, arising both from the ability of individuals to fulfill one or another 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 one or another position in society (ownership of property, capital, origin, membership of influential political forces).

Let's consider economic view to the problem. In accordance with this point of view, the root cause of social inequality lies in unequal treatment of property and distribution of material goods. Most brightly this approach manifested itself in Marxism. According to his version, it was the emergence of private property led to 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 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. Firstly, as a property of society. Written history does not know 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, therefore, 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 relationships between people, groups. Therefore, it becomes natural to strive to find the origins of this unequal position in the characteristics 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 has many faces and manifests itself in various parts of a single social organism: in the family, in an institution, in an enterprise, in small and large social groups. It is a necessary condition organization of social life. Parents, having an advantage in experience, skills, and financial resources over 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 a team helps to unite it and transform it into a sustainable entity, but at the same time it is accompanied by the provision leader of special rights.

Any organization strives to preserve inequalities seeing in him ordering principle, without which it is impossible reproduction of social connections and integration of the new. This is 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 the unequal distribution of social benefits and powers. In other words, all societies without exception are characterized by social inequality. 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 20th century believed. P. Sorokin, in any society, at any time, there is a struggle between the forces of stratification and the forces of equalization.

The concept of “stratification” came to sociology from geology, where it refers to the arrangement of the Earth’s layers along a vertical line.

Under social stratification We will understand a vertical slice of the arrangement of individuals and groups along horizontal layers (strata) based on such characteristics as income inequality, access to education, 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, 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, while 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 located in a hierarchical order; Some of them, for example those based on age, do not contain grounds for social inequality. Thus, the status of a young child and the status of an 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 poor and rich, educated and uneducated, enterprising and non-entrepreneurial, those with 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 view social inequality as injustice.

In the history of social thought, the inequality of people has been explained in different ways: by the original inequality of souls, by divine providence, by the imperfection of human nature, by functional necessity by analogy with the organism.

German economist K. Marx connected social inequality with the emergence of private property and the struggle of interests of different classes and social groups.

German sociologist R. Dahrendorf also believed that economic and status inequality, which underlies the ongoing conflict of groups and classes and the struggle for the redistribution of power and status, 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 relationships and behavior, which leads to the stratification of society into the governed and the managers.

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 technological scientists, plant directors, etc. have higher status and income, while in Europe the dominant value is “preservation of cultural patterns”, due to what society gives special prestige to intellectuals in the humanities, clergy, and university professors.

Social inequality, being inevitable and necessary, manifests itself in all societies at all stages of historical development; Only the forms and degrees of social inequality change historically. Otherwise, individuals would lose the incentive to engage in complex and labor-intensive, dangerous or uninteresting activities and improve their skills. With the help of inequality in income and prestige, society encourages individuals to engage in necessary but difficult and unpleasant professions, rewards the more educated and talented, etc.

The problem of social inequality is one of the most acute and pressing in modern Russia. A feature of the social structure of Russian society is strong social polarization - the division of the population into poor and rich in the absence of a significant middle layer, which serves as 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 opportunities for independent life self-realization and improvement social status limited for a fairly large part of the Russian population.

Social inequality 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.

Key indicators of inequality:

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.

French sociologist Emile Durkheim identified two causes of social inequality:

1. The need to encourage the best in their field, that is, those who bring great benefit to society.
2. Different levels of personal qualities and talent among people.

Robert Michels put forward another reason: protection of the privileges of power. When a community exceeds a certain number of people, they nominate a leader, or an entire group, and give him greater powers than everyone else.

The key criteria for inequality were outlined by Max Weber:

1. Wealth (difference in income).
2. Prestige (difference in honor and respect).
3. Power (difference in the number of subordinates).

Hierarchy of inequality

There are two types of hierarchy, which are usually represented in the form of geometric shapes: a pyramid (a handful of oligarchs and a huge number of poor people, and the poorer, the greater their number) and a rhombus (few oligarchs, a few poor people and the bulk are the middle class). A diamond is preferable to a pyramid from the point of view of the stability of the social system. Roughly speaking, in the diamond-shaped version, middle peasants happy with life will not allow a handful of poor people to stage a coup and civil war. You don't have to go far for an example. In Ukraine, the middle class was far from being the majority, and dissatisfied residents of poor western and central villages overthrew the government in the country. As a result, the pyramid turned over, but remained a pyramid. There are other oligarchs at the top, and at the bottom there is still the majority of the country's population.

Addressing social inequality

It is natural that social inequality is perceived as social injustice, especially by those who are at the lowest level in the hierarchy of social division. IN modern society The issue of social inequality is the responsibility of social policy authorities.

Their responsibilities include:

1. Introduction of various compensations for socially vulnerable segments of the population.
2. Help poor families.
3. Benefits for the unemployed.
4. Determination of the minimum wage.
5. Social insurance.
6. Development of education.
7. Healthcare.
8. Environmental problems.
9. Improvement of workers' qualifications.

Social inequalities in society

Even a superficial look at the people around us gives reason to talk about their dissimilarity. People differ in gender, age, temperament, height, hair color, level of intelligence and many other characteristics. Nature endowed one with musical abilities, another with strength, a third with beauty, and for someone she prepared the fate of a frail and disabled person. 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 prevail over the simpletons. Inequality arising from natural differences is the first form of inequality, which also appears in one form or another in some species of animals. However, in human society the main thing is social inequality, which is inextricably linked with social differences and social differentiation.

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

Different levels of social development are the basis for social inequality, the emergence of rich and poor, stratification of society, its stratification (a stratum that includes people with the same income, power, education, prestige). Income is the amount of cash received by an individual per unit of time. This may be labor, or it may be the ownership of property that “works.”

Education is a complex of knowledge acquired in educational institutions. Its level is measured by the number of years of education. Let's say, junior high school is 9 years. The professor has more than 20 years of education behind him.

Power is the ability to impose your will on other people regardless of their wishes. It is measured by the number of people to whom it applies.

Prestige is an assessment of an individual’s position in society, as established 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 differently. Let us highlight the most interesting and noteworthy approaches.

Functionalism explains inequality based on the differentiation of social functions performed by different strata, classes, and communities. The functioning and development of society are possible only thanks to the division of labor, when each social group solves the corresponding tasks that are vital 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 is necessary types of human activity. Some of them are more important, others less.

Thus, on the basis of the hierarchy of social functions, a corresponding hierarchy of classes and layers that perform them is formed. Those who exercise general leadership and management of the country are invariably placed at the top of the social ladder, because only they can support and ensure the unity of society and create the necessary conditions for the successful performance of other functions.

Observations of the actions and behavior of specific individuals gave impetus to the development of a status explanation of social inequality. Each person, occupying a certain place in society, acquires his own status. Social inequality is inequality of status arising both from the ability of individuals to fulfill one or another 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 allowing a person to achieve one or another position in society (ownership of property, capital, origin, belonging to influential political forces).

Let's consider an economic view of the problem. In accordance with this point of view, the root cause of social inequality lies in unequal treatment of property and distribution of material goods. This approach was most clearly manifested in Marxism. According to his version, it was the emergence of private property that led to the social stratification of society and the formation of 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.

Secondly, inequality is always perceived as unequal relations between people and groups. Therefore, it becomes natural to strive to find the origins of this unequal position in the characteristics 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 has many faces and manifests itself in various parts of a single social organism: in the family, in an institution, in an enterprise, in small and large social groups. It is a necessary condition for the organization of social life. Parents, having an advantage in experience, skills, and financial resources over 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 a team helps to unite it and transform it into a stable entity, but at the same time it is accompanied by the granting of special rights to the leader.

Any social institution or organization strives to maintain inequality, seeing in it an ordering principle, without which the reproduction of social ties and the integration of new things is impossible. The same property is inherent in society as a whole.

PERCEPTIONS 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 the unequal distribution of social benefits and powers. In other words, all societies without exception are characterized by social inequality. 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.

The concept of “stratification” came to sociology from geology, where it refers to the arrangement of the Earth’s layers along a vertical line.

By social stratification we mean a vertical section of the arrangement of individuals and groups into horizontal layers (strata) based on 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 the 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, 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, while 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 located in a hierarchical order; Some of them, for example those based on age, do not contain grounds for social inequality. Thus, the status of a young child and the status of an 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 poor and rich, educated and uneducated, enterprising and non-entrepreneurial, those with 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 view social inequality as injustice.

The German economist K. Marx associated social inequality with the emergence of private property and the struggle of interests of various classes and social groups.

The German sociologist R. Dahrendorf also believed that economic and status inequality, which underlies the ongoing conflict of groups and classes and the struggle for the redistribution of power and status, 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; the environment (natural and social), which objectively puts individuals in an unequal position; the joint collective life of individuals, which requires the organization of relationships and behavior, which leads to the stratification of society into the governed and the managers.

The 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 technological scientists, plant directors, etc. have higher status and income, while in Europe the dominant value is “preservation of cultural patterns”, due to what society gives special prestige to intellectuals in the humanities, clergy, and university professors.

The problem of social inequality is one of the most acute and pressing in modern Russia. A feature of the social structure of Russian society is strong social polarization - the division of the population into poor and rich in the absence of a significant middle layer, which serves as 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 opportunities for independent self-realization and improvement of social status are limited for a fairly large part of the Russian population.

Causes of social inequality

Division of labor is considered one of the most important causes of social inequality because economic activity considered the most important.

We can identify inequality based on a number of characteristics:

1) Inequality based on physical characteristics, which can be divided into three types of inequalities:
a) Inequality based on physical differences;
b) Sexual inequality;
c) Inequality by age;

The reasons for the first inequality include belonging to a particular race, nationality, a certain height, fatness or thinness of the body, hair color, and even blood type. Very often the distribution of social benefits in society depends on some physical characteristic. Inequality is especially pronounced if the carrier of the trait is part of a “minority group.” Very often a minority group is discriminated against. One type of this inequality is “racism”. Some sociologists believe that economic competition is the cause of ethnic inequality.

Proponents of this approach emphasize the role of competition between groups of workers for scarce jobs. People with jobs (especially those in lower positions) feel threatened by job seekers. When the latter are members of ethnic groups, hostility may arise or intensify. Also, one of the reasons for the inequality of ethnic inequality can be considered personal qualities an individual, exhibiting which he considers another race inferior.

Sexual inequality is caused mainly by gender roles and sex roles. Basically, gender differences lead to inequality in the economic environment. Women have much less chance in life to participate in the distribution of social benefits: from Ancient India, in which girls were simply killed, to modern society, in which it is difficult for women to find work. This is connected, first of all, with sexual roles - a man’s place at work, a woman’s place at home.

The type of inequality associated with age mainly manifests itself in the different life chances of different age groups. Basically, it manifests itself at young and retirement age. Age inequality always affects us all.

2) Inequality due to differences in prescribed statuses.

Prescribed (ascriptive) status includes inherited factors: race, nationality, age, gender, place of birth, residence, marital status, some aspects of the parents. Very often, a person's prescribed statuses interfere with a person's vertical mobility, due to discrimination in society. This type of inequality includes a large number of aspects, and therefore very often leads to social inequality.

3) Inequality based on wealth ownership.

4) Inequality based on power.

5) Inequality of prestige.

These criteria of inequality were considered in the last century, and will be considered in our work in the future.

6) Cultural and symbolic inequality.

The last type of criterion can be partially attributed to the division of labor, since qualification includes a certain type of education.

The problem of social inequality

Social inequality is a form of social differentiation in which individuals, social groups, layers, classes are at different levels of the vertical social hierarchy and have unequal life chances and opportunities to meet needs.

Fulfilling qualitatively unequal working conditions and satisfying social needs to varying degrees, people sometimes find themselves engaged in economically heterogeneous labor, because these types of labor have different assessments of their social usefulness. Considering the dissatisfaction of society members existing system distribution of power, property and conditions for individual development, we still need to keep in mind the universality of human inequality.

The main mechanisms of social inequality are relations of property, power (dominance and subordination), social (i.e. socially assigned and hierarchized) division of labor, as well as uncontrolled, spontaneous social differentiation. These mechanisms are mainly associated with the characteristics of a market economy, with inevitable competition (including in the labor market) and unemployment. Social inequality is perceived and experienced by many people (primarily the unemployed, economic migrants, those who find themselves at or below the poverty line) as a manifestation of injustice. Social inequality and wealth stratification in society, as a rule, lead to increased social tension, especially during the transition period. This is precisely what is typical for Russia at present.

The main principles of social policy are:

1. protecting the standard of living by introducing various forms of compensation for price increases and indexing;
2. providing assistance to the poorest families;
3. provision of assistance in case of unemployment;
4. ensuring social insurance policy, establishing a minimum wages for workers;
5. development of education, health protection, and the environment mainly at the expense of the state;
6. pursuing an active policy aimed at ensuring qualifications.

Social stratification (from Latin stratum - layer and facio - I do), one of the basic concepts of sociology, denoting a system of signs and criteria of social stratification, position in society; social structure of society; branch of sociology. Stratification is one of the main topics in sociology.

The term “stratification” entered sociology from geology, where it refers to the arrangement of layers of the earth. But people initially likened the social distances and partitions that existed between them to layers of the earth.

Stratification is the division of society into social layers (strata) by combining different social positions with approximately the same social status, reflecting the prevailing idea of social inequality, built vertically (social hierarchy), along its axis according to one or more stratification criteria (indicators social status).

The division of society into strata is carried out on the basis of the inequality of social distances between them - the main property of stratification.

Social strata are built vertically and in strict sequence according to indicators of well-being, power, education, leisure, and consumption. IN social stratification a certain social distance is established between people (social positions) and unequal access of members of society to certain socially significant scarce resources is fixed by establishing social filters on the boundaries separating them. For example, social strata can be distinguished by levels of income, education, power, consumption, nature of work, and leisure time. The social strata identified in society are assessed according to the criterion of social prestige, which expresses the social attractiveness of certain positions. But in any case, social stratification is the result of more or less conscious activities (policies) of the ruling elites, who are extremely interested in imposing on society and legitimizing their own social ideas about unequal access of society members to social benefits and resources. The simplest stratification model is dichotomous - dividing society into elites and masses. In some of their earliest, archaic social systems, the structuring of society into clans was carried out simultaneously with the establishment of social inequality between and within them. This is how those who are initiated into certain social practices (priests, elders, leaders) and the uninitiated - laymen (all other members of society, ordinary members of the community, fellow tribesmen) appear. Within them, society can further stratify if necessary.

As society becomes more complex (structuring), a parallel process occurs - the integration of social positions into a certain social hierarchy. This is how castes, estates, classes, etc. appear. Modern ideas about the stratification model that has developed in society are quite complex - multi-layered, multidimensional (carried out along several axes) and variable (allow the existence of many, sometimes stratification models). The degree of freedom of social movement (mobility) from one social layer to another determines what kind of society it is - closed or open.

Social stratification is based on social differentiation, but is not identical to it.

Social differentiation is the division of a social whole or its part into interconnected elements that appear as a result of evolution, the transition from simple to complex. Differentiation primarily includes the division of labor, the emergence of different professions, statuses, roles, and groups. Social differentiation is the process of the emergence of functionally specialized institutions and division of labor. Even at the dawn of their history, people discovered that the division of functions and labor increases the efficiency of society, therefore, in all societies there is a separation of statuses and roles. At the same time, members of society must be distributed within the social structure in such a way that various statuses are filled and the roles corresponding to them are fulfilled.

Although the statuses that make up a social structure may differ, they do not necessarily have to occupy a specific place in relation to each other. For example, the statuses of an infant and a child are differentiated, but one of them is not considered superior to the other - they are simply different. Social differentiation provides social material that may or may not become the basis of social gradation. In other words, social differentiation is found in social stratification, but not vice versa.

Open and closed stratification systems.

There are open and closed stratification systems. A social structure whose members can change their status relatively easily is called an open system of stratification. A structure whose members can change their status with great difficulty is called a closed stratification system. A somewhat similar distinction is reflected in the concepts of achieved and ascribed status: achieved statuses are acquired through individual choice and competition, while ascribed statuses are given by a group or society.

In open systems of stratification, each member of society can change his status, rise or fall on the social ladder based on his own efforts and abilities. Modern societies, experiencing the need for qualified and competent specialists capable of managing complex social, political and economic processes, provide fairly free movement of individuals in the stratification system. An example of a closed system of stratification is the caste organization of India (it functioned until 1900).

Traditionally, Hindu society was divided into castes, and people inherited social status at birth from their parents and could not change it during their lifetime. There were thousands of castes in India, but they were all grouped into four main ones: the Brahmans, or priestly caste, numbering about 3% of the population; Kshatriyas, descendants of warriors, and Vaishyas, traders, who together made up about 7% of Indians; Shudras, peasants and artisans, made up about 70% of the population, the remaining 20% were Harijans, or untouchables, who were traditionally scavengers, scavengers, tanners and swineherds.

Representatives of the upper castes despised, humiliated and oppressed members of the lower castes, regardless of their behavior and personal merits. Strict rules did not allow representatives of higher and lower castes to communicate, because it was believed that this would spiritually pollute members of the higher caste. And today in some parts of India, especially in rural areas, castes determine the type of behavior, establishing diets, lifestyles, employment and even the rules of courtship. Dharma legitimizes this system by affirming the idea that bearing the burden of one's fate without complaint is the only morally acceptable way to exist. But the caste system never excluded the possibility of moving up the social ladder. A completely closed system of stratification could not exist due to unequal birth and death rates in different castes, discontent among the humiliated and exploited, competition between members of different castes, the introduction of more advanced agricultural methods, the transition to Buddhism and Islam, and a number of other factors.

Inequality of social groups

The theories of social stratification and social mobility are based on the concepts of social differentiation and social inequality. Sometimes these concepts are identified, but it should be noted that the concept of “social differentiation” is broader in scope and includes any social differences, including those not related to inequality. For example, some people are football fans and others are not. This activity acts as a differentiating quality, but will not be a sign of social inequality. Social inequality is a form of social differentiation in which individuals, social groups, strata, classes occupy a certain position in the hierarchy of social statuses, have unequal life chances and opportunities to satisfy needs.

The idea of social equality is one of the great and most attractive myths of mankind. In reality, there was not and is not a single complex society in which social equality existed. Moreover, it is social differences and social inequality that ensure the development of humanity as a whole. At the same time, a significant level of social inequality is completely unacceptable. The main problem is to constantly find an acceptable relationship for society and its constituent individuals between the degree of inevitable social inequality and people’s ideas about social justice.

If among the members of a society there are both haves and have-nots, then such a society is characterized by the presence of economic stratification. No labels or signs can change the fact of inequality, which is expressed in differences in income and living standards. If within a group there are managers and managed; this means that such a group is politically differentiated. If members of a society are divided into different groups according to their type of activity, occupation, and some professions are considered more prestigious than others, then such a society is professionally differentiated. These are the three main forms of social stratification. As a rule, they are closely intertwined. People who belong to the highest stratum in one respect usually belong to the same stratum in other respects, and vice versa, although there are exceptions.

The term “stratification” itself is of Latin origin, borrowed from geology, and means “layering, stratification.” Social stratification is a set of social groups located hierarchically according to the criteria of social inequality and called strata. There are a lot of such criteria. K. Marx highlighted the ownership of property and the level of income. M. Weber added social prestige, the subject’s affiliation with political parties and power. P. Sorokin called the reason for stratification the uneven distribution of rights and privileges, responsibilities and duties in society, in addition to citizenship, occupation, nationality, and religious affiliation.

He proposed the following stratification division of society:

The highest stratum of professional administrators;
- mid-level technical specialists;
- commercial class;
- petty bourgeoisie;
- technicians and workers performing managerial functions;
- skilled workers;
- unskilled workers.

There are many other options for the stratification division of society. In recent years, the six-layer hierarchy of modern Western society has become most widespread:

Top class:

Upper upper class (hereditary wealth, up to 1% of population);
- lower stratum (earned wealth, up to 4% of the population).

Middle class:

Upper stratum (highly paid representatives of mental work and business people, from 15 to 25% of the population);
- the lowest stratum (“white collar workers”, managers, engineering and technical workers up to 40% of the population).

Lowest class:

Upper stratum (manual workers - 20 - 25% of the population);
- lower layer (lumpen, unemployed - 5-10% of the population).

There is social inequality between strata that cannot be overcome. The main way to ease social tension is the ability to move from one stratum to another.

The concept of social mobility was introduced into scientific circulation by P. Sorokin. Social mobility is a change in the place occupied by a person or group of people in the social structure of society. The more mobile a society is, the easier it is to move from one stratum to another, the more stable it is, according to supporters of the theory of social stratification.

There are two main types of social mobility - vertical and horizontal. Vertical mobility involves moving from one stratum to another. Depending on the direction of movement, there is upward vertical mobility (social ascent, upward movement) and downward vertical mobility (social descent, downward movement). Promotion is an example of upward mobility, dismissal, demotion is an example of downward mobility. With the vertical type of mobility, a person can make both ascents, for example, from a cashier to a bank manager, and falls.

An entrepreneur may lose part of his fortune and move to a group of people with lower incomes. Having lost a qualified job, a person may not find an equivalent one and, as a result, lose some of the characteristics characterizing his previous social status. Horizontal mobility involves moving a person from one group to another, located at the same level, on the same step. With this type of mobility, a person, as a rule, retains the basic characteristics of the group, for example, a worker moved to work at another enterprise, maintaining the salary level and the same rank, or moved to another city; the same in number of inhabitants, etc. Social movements also lead to the emergence of intermediate, border layers, which are called marginal.

The “social elevators” with the help of which movements are carried out are primarily the army, the church, and the school. Additional “social elevators” include the media, party activities, accumulation of wealth, and marriage to members of the upper class.

Social control and social responsibility.

The concept of responsibility in a broad sense is characterized in science as a social relationship between individual subjects (person, group, etc.) and those who control their behavior. It may be control of one's own conscience, public opinion or states.

Social responsibility can be defined as one of the aspects of relations between participants in public life, characterizing the relationship between the individual, society and the state, and individuals among themselves and including the subject’s awareness of the social significance of his behavior and its consequences, his obligation to act within the framework of the requirements of social norms regulating social relations. In relation to an individual person, responsibility is the obligation and willingness of the subject to answer for the actions taken, deeds and their consequences. An individual’s responsibility is formed as a result of the demands placed on him by society and the social group in which he is included. The requirements realized by the individual become the basis for the motivation of his behavior, which is regulated by conscience and a sense of duty. The formation of a personality involves instilling in her a sense of responsibility, which becomes her property. Responsibility is manifested in a person’s actions and covers the following questions: whether a person is generally able to fulfill the requirements, to what extent he correctly understood and interpreted them, whether he can foresee the consequences of his actions for himself and society, and whether he is ready to accept sanctions in case of violations. Responsibility must be approached based on the organic unity of rights and responsibilities, taking into account the place of individuals and groups of people in the system of social connections. The wider the social powers and real capabilities of individuals, the higher the level of their responsibility.

Depending on the content of social norms, moral, political, legal and other types of social responsibility are distinguished.

There are different sanctions in case of violation of certain norms. For example, in the absence of moral responsibility or violation of moral norms, so-called informal negative sanctions are applied: censure, remark, ridicule. Social responsibility is not only the responsibility of individuals, but also the responsibility of the state, all subjects of the political system of society for the obligations assumed, which is the essence of political responsibility. The main sanctions in case of failure of politicians to fulfill their obligations are non-election for the next term, criticism by the public, in the media. A specific feature of legal liability is the clear definition in law of the subjects, content, types, forms and mechanisms of implementation. The basis of legal liability is the commission of an offense. Depending on the nature of the offense, the types of legal liability are determined: criminal, administrative, disciplinary, civil.

Social inequality of people

The problems of social inequality are very close to the everyday, everyday consciousness and feelings of people. Since ancient times, people have noticed and worried that some people are unequal to others. This was expressed in different ways: in the perception and definition of existing differences as fair or unfair; in secular and religious ideologies that substantiated, justified or, on the contrary, refuted, criticized existing inequality; in political doctrines and programs that either emphasized the inevitability of inequality and even asserted its beneficial social functions or, on the contrary, formulated ideas of equality, demands for equalizing life chances; in developed philosophical concepts, including the search for sources of inequality in the fundamental characteristics of the human race or in social conditions its existence; in ethical theories that treat equality and inequality as moral categories (values). The problem of inequality and injustice was the topic around which the ground for mass riots was formed, social movements, revolutions. All this indicates that inequality is an extremely important feature, a distinctive feature of human society.

The fact that individuals, individual, concrete people are not equal to others is a banal truth, an obvious fact. People are tall and short, thin and fat, smarter and dumber, capable and stupid, old and young. Each person has a unique composition of genes, a unique biography and a unique personality. It is obvious. However, this kind of inequality is not what we are talking about when we talk about social inequality, that is, inequality that has social rather than individual characteristics and characteristics. And the most important of these social characteristics for a person are the nature of the groups to which he belongs and the nature of the positions he occupies.

Social inequality is unequal access (or unequal chances of access) to socially valued goods, resulting from belonging to different groups or from occupying different social positions.

Social inequality is a phenomenon that particularly acutely affects people’s sphere of interests and evokes strong emotions. Therefore, discussions on this topic often turn out to be closed within the framework of ideology, that is, such systems of thinking that obey and serve certain group interests. But inequality also remains an important subject of theoretical reflection, the purpose of which is not so much to justify or criticize inequality, but to clarify the essence of this phenomenon.

Ideologies of inequality

Despite the many specific formulations and arguments, all ideologies of inequality can be classified into three types. The first is elitist ideologies. They argue that there are groups that by their very nature are “superior” to others and therefore should occupy a higher position in society, which is expressed in their privileges, which are fully justified and justified. Such groups can be formed by birthright, as is the case, for example, in the formation of dynasties, aristocratic circles, citizens of ancient Rome, and castes in India. They may also include people who have special prerequisites for this, outstanding abilities, intelligence, people who seem to be close to God. Examples include tribal elders, shamans, and members of the clergy.

The other type are egalitarian ideologies created by or on behalf of discriminated groups. In their most radical form, they opposed any social inequality and privilege, demanding equal living conditions for all people.

The third type of ideology is meritocratic (from the English merit - merit). According to this ideology, inequalities in society are justified to the extent that they are the result of one's own merits. How can we understand that certain groups, layers, classes have special merits? The determining factors here are two interrelated factors. First, the level of one's own effort, the intensity of labor applied or the level of costs and sacrifices incurred, as well as the possession of exceptional and rare talents, skills or prerequisites. Secondly, this is the contribution that this group contributes to society as a whole, the extent to which this group satisfies the needs of the entire society, those benefits or those pleasures that the activities of this group bring to other people and groups of society. From these two points of view, the groups are very different from each other. Social inequality becomes a kind of fair reward for one’s own efforts and public benefit.

Theories of inequality

Discussions about inequality are not only the subject of ideological justifications. This theme also penetrates into the field of science, primarily into the field of philosophy, and later into the field social sciences. Since ancient times, the prevalence and painful sensitivity of manifestations of social inequality have caused a desire to find out the causes of this phenomenon.

Functional theory considers social inequality as an eternal, irremovable, and, moreover, inevitable phenomenon, necessary for the existence and functioning of human communities. Social inequality provides motivation for compulsory education and training, which creates a certain pool of candidates for mastering necessary professions, to perform the work necessary in a society of a given type, guaranteeing the very existence of this society. The conclusion naturally follows from this: in every existing society (for if it exists, it means it has survived and functions) social inequality is discovered. Social inequality is an obligatory, indispensable, universal, eternal component of any society.

There are three most important types of dichotomous inequality: the confrontation between the class of owners and the class of those deprived of property in the sense in which Karl Marx first formulated this confrontation; further, the confrontation between groups that form the majority and minority (in particular, nations and ethnic minorities), as well as the confrontation between the sexes - men and women, which is main theme feminist concepts that are now gaining more and more resonance.

Level of social inequality

Based on the level of inequality and poverty (the second is a consequence of the first), individuals, peoples, countries, and eras can be compared with each other. Cross-historical and cross-cultural analyzes are widely used in macrosociology. They reveal new aspects of the development of human society.

According to Gerhard Lenski's (1970) hypothesis, the degree of inequality varies across historical eras. The eras of slavery and feudalism were characterized by deep inequality.

G. Lenski explains the lower degree of inequality in industrial society by the lower concentration of power among managers, the presence of democratic governments, the struggle for influence between trade unions and entrepreneurs, a high level of social mobility and a developed system social security, which raises the living standards of the poor to certain, quite acceptable standards. Other points of view on the dynamics of inequality were expressed by K. Marx and P. Sorokin.

According to Marx, minimal inequality or its complete absence was observed in the primitive communal system. Inequality appeared and began to deepen in antagonistic formations (slavery and feudalism), reached its maximum during the period of classical capitalism and will grow rapidly as this formation develops. Marx's theory can be called "escalation of inequality." His theory of the absolute and relative impoverishment of the proletariat states that "the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer."

In contrast to Marx, P. Sorokin argued that there is no constant increase or decrease in inequality in the history of mankind. In different eras and different countries ah inequality either increases or decreases, i.e. fluctuates (oscillates).

Another way is to analyze the share of family income spent on food. It turns out that the rich pay only 5-7% of their income for food. The poorer the individual, the larger part of the income is spent on food, and vice versa.

At the end of the 20th century. is confirmed empirically in the middle of the 19th century. a statistical pattern known as Engel's law: the lower the income, the greater the share of expenditure should be allocated to food. As family income increases, absolute expenses on food increase, but in relation to all family expenses they decrease, and the share of expenses on clothing, heating and lighting changes slightly, and the share of expenses on meeting cultural needs increases sharply.

Later, other empirical “laws” of consumption were found: Schwabe’s law (1868) - the poorer the family, the higher the share of housing costs; Wright's law (1875) - the higher the income, the higher the level of savings and their share in expenditure.

In developed countries, the share of meeting housing needs in the composition of expenses is large (more than 20%), practically it is the largest: in the USA - 25%, in France - 27, in Japan - 24, etc., while in former USSR it was only 8%. In Russia, the cost of paying for the actual living space was 1.3%, and taking into account utilities- 4.3%. This indicates, in particular, the poor provision of housing for the population: 5-6% Russian families(this is 2.5 million families) continue to live in communal apartments, and 70% of them occupy only one room; more than 4% of our fellow citizens live in hostels Radaev V.V., Shkaratan O.I. Social stratification.

The poor and the rich differ in the degree to which their needs for cultural and household goods are met, especially more expensive ones that are not purchased very often. Thus, in households with an income 3 times higher than a certain basic level, there are 1.5 times more items in this group. According to budget surveys, low-income groups have 1.5 times fewer refrigerators, 3 times fewer tape recorders, 9 times fewer cameras, and 12 times fewer vacuum cleaners than high-income groups. The level of average per capita consumer expenditures of low-income households was approximately 30% of their value in high-income households.

Examples of social inequality

Social inequality is unequal access of people to social, economic and other benefits. By good we mean that (things, services, etc.) that a person considers useful for himself (purely economic definition).

Society is structured in such a way that people have unequal access to goods. The reasons for this state of affairs are varied. One of them is the limited resources for the production of goods. There are over 6 billion people on Earth today, and everyone wants to eat deliciously and sleep sweetly. And food and land, in the end, are becoming increasingly scarce.

It is clear that the geographical factor also plays a role. Russia, despite its entire territory, is home to only 140 million people, and the population is rapidly declining. But, for example, in Japan - 120 million - this is on four islands. With wildly limited resources, the Japanese live well: they build artificial land. China, with a population of over three billion people, also lives well in principle. Such examples seem to refute the thesis that the more people there are, the less benefits and there should be greater inequality.

In fact, it is influenced by many other factors: the culture of a given society, work ethic, social responsibility of the state, industrial development, development of monetary relations and financial institutions, etc.

In addition, social inequality is strongly influenced by natural inequality. For example, a person was born without legs. Or lost legs and arms. For example, like this individual:

Of course, he lives abroad - and, in principle, I think he lives well. But in Russia, I think, he would not have survived. Our people with arms and legs are dying of hunger, and social services no one is needed at all. So the social responsibility of the state is extremely important in smoothing out inequality.

Very often in my classes I heard from people that if they get more or less seriously ill, the company they work for asks them to quit. And they can't do anything. They don’t even know how to protect their rights. And if they knew, then these companies would “get” a decent amount of money and next time they would think a hundred times whether it is worth doing this to their employees. That is, legal illiteracy of the population can be a factor of social inequality.

It is important to understand that when studying this phenomenon, sociologists use so-called multidimensional models: they evaluate people according to several criteria. These include: income, education, power, prestige, etc.

Thus, this concept covers many different aspects. And if you are writing a social studies essay on this topic, then reveal these aspects!

Social inequality in Russia

Our country is one of those in which social inequality is manifested to the highest degree. Very a big difference between rich and poor. For example, when I was still a volunteer, a volunteer from Germany came to us in Perm. For those who don’t know, in Germany, instead of serving in the army, you can volunteer for a year in any country. So, they arranged for him to live with a family for a year. A day later, the German volunteer left there. Because, according to him, even by German standards, this is a luxurious life: a luxurious apartment, etc. He cannot live in such luxurious conditions when he sees homeless people and beggars begging on the streets of the city.

Plus, in our country, social inequality manifests itself in an extremely large form in relation to different professions. A school teacher receives, God forbid, 25,000 rubles for one and a half times the rate, and some painter can receive all 60,000 rubles, the salary of a crane operator starts from 80,000 rubles, a gas welder - from 50,000 rubles.

Most scientists see the reason for such social inequality in the fact that our country is experiencing a transformation of the social system. It broke down overnight, along with the state. But no new one has been built. That is why we are dealing with such social inequality.

Socio-economic inequality

To describe inequality between groups of people, researchers use concepts such as “social inequality”, “economic inequality”, “socio-economic inequality”, “socio-economic differentiation”, “social stratification”, “socio-economic stratification”. Let's consider the similarities of the listed categories and their features.

When people talk about social inequality, they primarily mean the presence of rich and poor people in society. At the same time, when classifying a person as “rich,” they are guided not only and not so much by the amount of income he receives, but by the level of his wealth. Income shows how much the purchasing power of a person's income has increased over a certain period, while wealth determines the amount of purchasing power at a given fixed moment. That is, wealth is a stock, and income is a flow.

In the very general view The level of social inequality is determined by differences in the volume and structure of individual wealth.

Individual wealth can take three main forms:

1) “physical” wealth - land, house or apartment, car, household appliances, furniture, works of art and jewelry and other consumer goods;
2) financial wealth - stocks, bonds, bank deposits, cash, checks, bills, etc.;
3) human capital- wealth embodied in the person himself, created as a result of upbringing, education and experience (i.e. acquired), as well as received from nature (talent, memory, reaction, physical strength, etc.).

However, in some cases, human capital is not considered as a form of individual wealth, since it is attributed to the causes of social inequality, which is understood as the differentiation of people (the population of one country, the population of different countries of the world, employees of an organization, etc.) according to property and, as a consequence, , according to standard of living.

Differentiation by definition also means differences between people and social groups in terms of income, property, wealth, prosperity, standard of living; the difference between the individual parts of any aggregate. The concepts of “inequality” and “differentiation” are identified by researchers: “inequality is a form of social differentiation,” “inequality is the differentiation of people.” In most cases, socio-economic differentiation is currently viewed as inequality in the levels of well-being of the population.

The terms “economic”, “economic”, “socio-economic”, “socio-economic” are used by the authors in combination with the terms “inequality” and “differentiation” in cases where it is necessary to emphasize the economic nature of the causes of this phenomenon (wage differentiation, imperfection of redistribution mechanisms, etc.). In essence, using the terms “economic inequality” or “socio-economic differentiation”, researchers talk about the phenomenon of dividing the population into groups according to their standard of living.

The term “stratification,” in contrast to the already mentioned inequality and differentiation, contains a dynamic component and means an increase in the degree of inequality in society, as evidenced by the following definition. Economic stratification of society - increasing differences in income and living standards between individual segments of the population, increasing the gap between high- and low-paid members of society, leading to deepening differentiation of the population in terms of social security.

As noted above, the concept of social inequality is not limited to the inequality of members of society in absolute and relative size the income they receive. However, it is believed that of all the components of socio-economic inequality, income differences play a special role. Cash income mainly determines the standard of living of people, the motivation of work and business activity, the social well-being of the population and the political situation in society depend on it.

Differentiation (inequality) of income of the population is actually existing differences in the level of income of the population, which largely predetermine social differentiation in society and the nature of its social structure. Differentiation of income of the population is the result of income distribution, expressing the degree of uneven distribution of benefits and manifested in the difference in the shares of income received by different groups of the population.

A society with rational income differentiation, relatively uniform, is most stable due to a large middle class, has intensive social mobility, strong incentives to social promotion and professional growth. And vice versa, as evidenced by the historical experience of Latin American countries, a society with a sharp differentiation of incomes of the extreme polar groups of the population is characterized by social instability, the absence of strong incentives for professional growth, and a significant degree of crime. social relations.

Thus, by socio-economic inequality we understand the differences between people and between social groups in the provision of material goods and in the ability to satisfy their needs, which is based on the differentiation of incomes of the population.

The process of income differentiation, and therefore socio-economic inequality in society, is influenced by many different factors: economic, social, demographic, political, psychological, etc. Some factors influence the differentiation process directly, others indirectly, and others are the background for action the rest. Some factors influence the formation of household income, others influence the process of their distribution and redistribution. The impact of some differentiation factors can be mitigated or even eliminated, while others cannot. At the same time, they are all interconnected and interdependent, they act not separately, but together, strengthening or weakening each other. Factors that differentiate incomes of the population can be both long-term and short-term in nature. Many of them are ambiguous in their effect.

There are such factors of social inequality inherent in the life of society as:

Differences in individual abilities;
initial welfare of households and their investment opportunities;
differentiation in wages for skilled and unskilled labor;
demographic characteristics and household mobility;
development of the social protection system;
demand for skilled labor;
inequality between urban and rural populations.

To these factors in a transition economy, researchers usually add:

Privatization of enterprises;
liberalization of prices, wages, trade and markets;
liberalization of financial markets;
earnings in the shadow economy;
tax reform;
reform of the wage system;
wage inequality by industry and region;
expansion of poverty.

However, one or another combination of several criteria is most often used, including:

Attitude to ownership of the means of production;
opportunity to accept strategic decisions or influence their adoption;
the amount of accumulated material wealth of the family;
method and source of obtaining the bulk of income;
scope of activity and nature of work;
the level of current cash income of the family;
the nature and volume of consumption of material goods and services;
level of education, professional qualifications;
place of residence and quality of primary housing;
belonging to a specific subcultural or subethnic group.

Structured social inequality

Social inequality is a form of social differentiation in which individuals, social groups, strata, classes are at different levels of the vertical social hierarchy and have unequal life chances and opportunities to satisfy needs.

Any society is structured according to national, social class, demographic, geographical and other characteristics. Such structuring inevitably gives rise to social inequality.

Social structure is determined by social differences between people, that is, differences generated by social factors: division of labor, way of life, social roles performed by individuals or social groups.

The source of social inequality is the very development of civilization. Each individual person cannot master all the achievements of material and spiritual culture. Specialization of people arises and, along with it, more and less valuable or more relevant, in-demand types of activities arise.

Social stratification (from the Latin stratum - layer and facio - do) is a systematically manifested inequality between groups of people, arising as an unintended consequence of social relations and being reproduced in each next generation. The concept of social stratification is used to denote the conditions under which social groups have unequal access to such social benefits as money, power, prestige, education, information, professional career, self-realization, etc.

Western sociology traditionally considers the social structure of society from the point of view of the theory of stratification.

Stratification is an organization of society in which some individuals and social groups have more, others have less, and others may have nothing at all. It is almost impossible to resolve this conflict. It is based on two incompatible absolute truths.

On the one hand, the stratification of society is fraught with social conflicts, even revolutions. People who are at the bottom of the stratification system are disadvantaged both physically and morally. On the other hand, stratification forces people and social groups to show initiative, enterprise, and ensure the progress of society.

Karl Marx considered class conflict to be the main source of social change. According to Marx, antagonistic classes are distinguished according to two objective criteria: a common economic situation, determined by their relationship to the means of production, and a common power of power in comparison with state power.

The founder of the theory of stratification, Max Weber, unlike Marx, believed that social position is determined not only by property rights, but also by prestige and power. Based on these three criteria, three levels of social stratification can be distinguished: lower, middle and higher. Differences in property create classes, differences in prestige create status groups (social strata), differences in power create political parties.

Fundamental to modern stratification concepts is the principle of functionalism, which presupposes the need for social inequality, due to the fact that each social stratum is a functionally necessary element of society.

Each person moves in social space, in the society in which he lives. Sometimes these movements are easily felt and identified, for example, when an individual moves from one place to another, moves from one religion to another, or changes in marital status. This changes the position of the individual in society and speaks of his movement in social space. However, there are movements of an individual that are difficult to determine not only to the people around him, but also to himself. For example, it is difficult to determine a change in an individual’s position due to an increase in prestige, an increase or decrease in opportunities to use power, or a change in income. At the same time, such changes ultimately affect a person’s behavior, his needs, attitudes, interests and orientations.

All social movements of an individual or a social group are designated by such a concept as social mobility. According to Pitirim Sorokin’s definition, “social mobility is understood as any transition of an individual, or a social object, or a value created or modified through activity, from one social position to another.”

P. Sorokin distinguishes two types of social mobility: horizontal and vertical. Horizontal mobility is the transition of an individual or social object from one social position to another, lying at the same level. In all these cases, the individual does not change the social stratum to which he belongs or his social status. The most important process is vertical mobility, which is a set of interactions that facilitate the transition of an individual or social object from one social layer to another. This includes, for example, a promotion, a significant improvement in well-being or a transition to a higher social level.

Society can elevate the status of some individuals and lower the status of others. Depending on this, a distinction is made between upward and downward social mobility, or social ascent and social decline. Upward mobility (professional, economic or political) exists in two main forms: as individual ascent (the infiltration of individuals from a lower stratum to a higher one) and as the creation of new groups of individuals with their inclusion in a higher stratum next to or instead of existing groups of this stratum. Likewise downward mobility exists in the form of both pushing individuals from high social statuses to lower ones, and lowering the social statuses of an entire group.

The desire to achieve a higher status is determined by each individual’s need to achieve success and avoid failure in the social aspect. The actualization of this need generates the force with which the individual strives to achieve a higher social position or to maintain his current position and not slide down. In order to achieve higher status, an individual must overcome barriers between groups or strata. An individual striving to join a higher status group has a certain energy aimed at overcoming these barriers. The probabilistic nature of infiltration in vertical mobility is due to the fact that when assessing the process, one should take into account the constantly changing situation, which consists of many factors, including the personal relationships of individuals.

To quantify mobility processes, speed and intensity indicators are usually used. The speed of social mobility refers to the vertical social distance or the number of strata - economic, professional or political - that an individual passes through in his upward or downward movement over a certain period of time. The intensity of social mobility refers to the number of individuals changing social positions in a vertical or horizontal direction over a certain period of time.

There is often a need to consider the process of mobility from the point of view of the relationship between its speed and intensity. In this case, the aggregate mobility index for a given social community is used. In this way, it is possible, for example, to compare one society with another in order to find out in which of them or in which period mobility is higher in all respects. Such an index can be calculated separately for the economic, professional or political field of activity.

Social income inequality

Differences in wages and other sources of formation family budget determine inequality in income distribution. For example, average salary There are approximately 1,500 teachers in the school, 700 janitors, 4,500 financiers, 500 scholarships. Why does such income inequality exist? Really, market system does not provide for absolute equality because one uses the factors of production better than another. And thus earns more money. However, there are also more specific reasons that contribute to this inequality.

Causes of inequality in the distribution of national income:

1) differences in abilities;
2) differences in education;
3) differences in professional experience;
4) differences in the distribution of property;
5) risk, luck, failure, access to valuable information. Differences in ability. People are different physically and mentally.

Capabilities. For example, some people are blessed with exceptional physical abilities and can earn a lot of money for their athletic achievements. And some are endowed with entrepreneurial skills and have a penchant for running a successful business. So, people who have talent in any area of life can receive more money than others.

Differences in education. People differ not only in their abilities, but also in their level of education. However, these differences are partly the result of the individual's own choices. So, after finishing 11th grade, some will go to work, and others will go to university. So, a university graduate has more opportunities to earn more income than people who do not have a higher education.

Differences in professional experience. People's incomes differ, including due to differences in professional experience. So, if Ivanov works in a company for one year, then it is clear that he will receive a salary less than Petrov, who has been working in this company for more than 10 years and has more professional experience.

Differences in the distribution of property. Differences in the distribution of property are the most significant cause of income inequality. A considerable number of people have little or no property and, accordingly, receive little or no income. And others are owners of more real estate, equipment, shares, etc. and receive more income.

Risk, luck, failure, access to valuable information. These factors also have a significant impact on income distribution. Thus, a person who is inclined to take risks economic activity, can earn more income than other people who are unable to take risks. Luck also helps you earn more income. For example, if a person finds a treasure.

Lorenz curve

All these reasons act in different directions, increasing or decreasing inequality. To determine the extent of this inequality, economists use the Lorenz curve, which reflects the actual distribution of national income. This curve is used by economists to compare incomes over different periods of time, or between different strata of a particular country, or between different countries. The horizontal axis of the curve represents the percentage of population, and the vertical axis represents the percentage of income. Of course, economists divide the population into five parts, each of which includes 20% of the population. Population groups are distributed along an axis from the poorest to the richest. The theoretical possibility of absolutely equal distribution of income is represented by line AB. The AB line indicates that any group of the population receives the corresponding percentage of income. The completely uneven distribution of income is represented by the WB line. It means that 100% of families receive the entire national income. A completely equal distribution means that 20% of families receive 20% of total income, 40% - 40%, 60% - 60%, etc.

Let us assume that each of the population groups received a certain share of national income.

Of course, in real life, the poor part of the population receives 5-7% of the total income, and the rich - 40-45%. Therefore, the Lorenz curve lies between the lines that reflect absolute equality and inequality in the distribution of income. The more unequal the income distribution, the greater the concavity of the Lorenz curve and the closer it will be to the point. Conversely, the more equitable the distribution, the closer the Lorenz curve will be to the line.

How can we alleviate the problem of inequality in the distribution of national income between different segments of the population? In most developed countries, it is the state (government) that undertakes obligations to reduce income inequality. The government can solve this problem through the tax system. That is, the wealthy parts of the population are subject to higher taxes (in percentage terms) than the low-income ones. In addition, the state can use the tax revenues received as transfer payments in favor of the poor. In almost all countries there are different social programs for the protection of the population, namely assistance with social insurance in case of job loss, loss of a breadwinner, disability benefits, and the like.

So, the state tax system and various transfer programs significantly reduce the degree of inequality in the distribution of the country's national income.

Concept of social inequality

One of the central places in sociology is occupied by the problem of social inequality. The uneven distribution of sociocultural goods and values depending on the social status of an individual or social groups is understood as social inequality. Social inequality implies unequal access of people to economic

Resources, social benefits and political power. The most common way to measure inequality is to compare the highest and lowest levels of income in a given society.

There are several approaches to assessing the problem of social inequality. Conservatives argued that the unequal distribution of social benefits serves as a tool for solving the main problems of society. Supporters of the radical approach sharply criticize the existing social order and believe that social inequality is a mechanism of exploitation and is associated with the struggle for valuable and scarce goods and services. Modern theories of inequality in the broad sense belong to either the first or the second direction. Theories based on the conservative tradition are called functionalist; those rooted in radicalism are called conflict theories.

According to functionalist theory, social inequality is a necessary property of any normally developing social system. Wilbert Moore and Kingsley Davis argue that social stratification is necessary; society cannot do without stratification and classes. A system of stratification is required to provide individuals with incentives to perform the duties associated with their position.

Social inequality is a system of relations emerging in society that characterizes the uneven distribution of scarce resources of society (money, power, education and prestige) between different strata or segments of the population. The main measures of inequality are money.

Conflict theorists believe that stratification in society exists because it benefits individuals and groups who have power over others. From the point of view of conflictology, society is an arena where people fight for privileges, prestige and power, and groups with advantages secure it through coercion.

Conflict theory is largely based on the ideas of Karl Marx. Karl Marx believed that at the heart of the social system are economic interests and related production relations, which form the basis of society. Since the fundamental interests of the main subjects of capitalist society (workers and capitalists) are diametrically opposed and irreconcilable, conflict in this society is inevitable. At a certain stage of their development, material productive forces, K. Marx believed, come into a state of conflict with existing production relations, primarily with property relations. This leads to social revolution and the overthrow of capitalism.

According to Marx, ownership of the means of production is one of the sources of power. Another source is control over people, possession of controls. This point can be illustrated using the example of the Soviet Union. The elite was the party bureaucracy, which formally controlled both nationalized and socialized property and the entire life of society. The role of bureaucracy in society, i.e. monopoly control of national income and national wealth puts it in a special privileged position.

Inequality can be represented by the relationship between the concepts “rich” and “poor”. Poverty is the economic and sociocultural state of people who have a minimum amount of liquid assets and limited access to social benefits. Poverty is a special image and style of life, norms of behavior and psychology passed on from generation to generation. Therefore, sociologists talk about poverty as a special subculture. The most common and easy-to-calculate way to measure inequality is to compare the lowest and highest incomes in a given country. Another way is to analyze the share of family income spent on food.

Economic inequality means that a minority of the population always owns the majority of the nation's wealth. The highest incomes are received by the smallest part of society, and the average and lowest incomes are received by the majority of the population. Accordingly, a geometric figure illustrating the stratification profile of Russian society will resemble a cone, while in the USA the figure will resemble a rhombus.

The poverty threshold is the amount of money officially established as the minimum income, which is enough for an individual or family only to purchase food, clothing and pay for housing - the subsistence level. Each region has its own cost of living and, accordingly, its own poverty line.

In sociology, a distinction is made between absolute and relative poverty. Absolute poverty is understood as a condition in which an individual, with his income, is unable to satisfy even basic needs for food, housing, clothing, or is able to satisfy only minimal needs. Relative poverty refers to the inability to maintain a decent standard of living. Relative poverty measures how poor a particular individual or family is compared to other people. The working poor are a Russian phenomenon. Today, their low incomes are due, first of all, to the unreasonably low level of wages and pensions.

Poverty, unemployment, economic and social instability in society contribute to the emergence of a social bottom: beggars begging for alms; "homeless"; street children; street prostitutes. These are people deprived of social resources, stable connections, who have lost basic social skills and dominant values of society.

Let us characterize the six social strata of modern Russia:

1) top - economic, political and security elite;
2) upper middle - medium and large entrepreneurs;
3) middle - small entrepreneurs, managers of the production sector, the highest intelligentsia, the working elite, military personnel;
4) basic - the mass intelligentsia, the bulk of the working class, peasants, trade and service workers;
5) lower - unskilled workers, long-term unemployed, single pensioners;
6) “social bottom” - homeless people released from prison.

Social inequality causes social protest and confrontation. The entire history of the class structure of society is accompanied by an ideological and political struggle for social equality.

Egalitarianism (French - equality) is an ideological and theoretical movement that advocates universal equality, up to the equal distribution of material and sociocultural values. Manifestations of egalitarianism can be found in the social movements of Ancient Greece and Rome, and in the text of the Bible. The ideas of egalitarianism found their support among the Jacobins during the Great French Revolution, among the Bolsheviks in Russia at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, and among the leaders of national liberation movements in third world countries in the 20th century. Egalitarianism can be classified as a radical ideological and political movement.

Theories of social inequality

In the European tradition, several theories of social inequality have been developed. The most famous are the theory of classes and the theory of elites. However, there are also alternative explanations. The ambiguity of descriptions of inequality is mainly associated with the diversity of approaches to social reality, that is, the existence of alternative approaches to a common sociological object.

Theory of E. Durkheim. One of the first sociologists to address the topic of social inequality was E. Durkheim. In his work “On the Division of Social Labor,” published in 1893, he outlined his point of view on this issue.

Durkheim identified two aspects of social inequality: inequality of ability and socially embedded inequality. In this respect, he was a continuator of the traditions of European thought. Also J.-J. Rousseau said that there are two types of inequality: natural, or physical, which is established by nature, and conditional, or political, which is established with the consent of people.

As for natural inequality, according to Durkheim, it only intensifies during the learning process. From the scientist's point of view, the most talented people are encouraged by society to perform the functions that are most important from the point of view of this society. At least, a sufficiently developed society seeks to attract these people to perform these functions with prestige and high incomes.

Durkheim also expressed the idea that in any society different types Activities are not evaluated equally; more and less important and prestigious ones are distinguished among them. All the features that are important with. points of view of the survival of society are not equivalent, in each society they are built into a hierarchy, and the way this happens is specific to a given society. Thus, in one society, functions associated with religious cult may be more valued, while in another, economic prosperity comes to the fore.

Durkheim's theory was further developed in the works of K. Davis and W. Moore.

Class theory. The concept of social class was introduced and developed by economists, philosophers and historians (A. Smith, E. Condillac, C.-A. Saint-Simon, F. Chizo, etc.) back in the 18th century. However, only K. Marx truly “loaded” it with meaning. According to Marx, classes arise and contend on the basis of the different positions and different roles performed by individuals in the productive structure of society. K. Marx himself rightly noted that the merit of discovering the existence of classes and their struggle among themselves does not belong to him. However, before Marx, no one proposed such a deep justification for the class structure of society based on fundamental analysis the entire system of economic relations.

Marx's theory is a variant of explaining inequality using the concept of conflict.

According to Marx, the main, most important feature society is the mode of production - the way in which goods are produced. For example, the capitalist mode of production is characterized by the fact that the owner of the means of production pays workers wages, which they then spend to satisfy their needs at their own discretion. Another important feature of economic organization is the class that occupies a dominant economic position, that is, owns the means of production, and the exploited class. In a feudal society, the exploiters are the feudal nobles, and the exploited are the peasants; In a capitalist society, the exploiter is the bourgeoisie, the exploited are the workers. The dominant ideology in any society is the ideology of the class that owns the means of production. It is created in order to maintain the existing state of affairs, that is, the ruling class’s access to benefits.

This distribution of roles is based on economic interest. The goal of any economic system is to make profit. By exploiting someone, the ruling class extracts surplus value, that is, profit - part of the cost of the product, which exceeds the sum of the costs of equipment and raw materials and labor costs.

Marx assumed that the status quo was not sustainable. He predicted that at some point the workers would realize their situation and change it through revolution. This assumption did not materialize for several reasons. Firstly, the picture of social life drawn by Marx suffers from excessive unambiguity: in it everything is distributed into two categories, between “black” and “white”. In fact, the situation is more complicated. In particular, many business owners began to pay more attention to protecting the interests of their employees, sought to raise wages and provide them with benefits that were previously unavailable to them. Such a socially oriented policy was one of the first obstacles to the formation of a united exploited working class, aware of its interests and ready to fight its position.

Secondly, Marx identified workers with wage earners. But among employees there is a fairly strong stratification, and those of them who receive the most high salary, are interested in an alliance with the owners of the means of production. This stratification is also due to the fact that at some enterprises a socially oriented policy has been developed.

M. Weber's theory. Max Weber, along with Marx, had a decisive influence on the formation of modern ideas about the essence, forms and functions of social stratification. Weber, being an opponent of Marx on many issues, could not limit himself to only the economic aspect of stratification, and therefore took into account factors such as power and prestige. Weber viewed property, power, and prestige as three separate, interacting factors underlying hierarchies in any society. Differences in ownership give rise to economic classes; differences related to power give rise to political parties, and differences of prestige give rise to status groupings, or strata. Based on this, Weber built a theory of “three autonomous dimensions of stratification.” He emphasized that "classes", "status groups" and "parties" are phenomena related to the distribution of power within a community.

The main difference between Weber's ideas and Marx's views is that, according to Weber, a class cannot be a subject of action, since it is not a community. In contrast to the Marxist approach, for Weber the concept of class became possible only with the emergence of capitalist society, where the most important regulator of relations is the market, with the help of which people satisfy their needs for material goods and services. However, in the market, people occupy different positions or are in different “class situations”: some sell goods and services, while others sell labor, that is, some own property, while others do not.

Weber did not propose a clear class structure for capitalist society.

However, taking into account his methodological principles, it is possible to reconstruct Weber’s typology of classes under capitalism:

1. The working class, deprived of property.
2. Petty bourgeoisie - a class of small businessmen and traders.
3. Dispossessed white collar workers: technicians and intellectuals.
4. Administrators and managers.
5. Owners, that is, a) owners who receive rent from ownership of the means of production, and b) the “commercial class” (entrepreneurs).

It must be borne in mind that class stratification is not universal: it is a product of capitalist society, and therefore has existed only since the 18th century. The concept of “class” from this point of view is not neutral: it generalizes phenomena and problems characteristic specifically of capitalist society. It was during this period that the formation of a new independent force began - the “fourth estate”, which included traders, merchants, entrepreneurs and bankers. At the same time, the number of the other three classes (nobility, clergy and peasantry) remained unchanged or decreased. The reduction in numbers was especially noticeable in the peasant class, since agriculture was in crisis and many bankrupt peasants moved to cities, thus contributing to the development of industry. It is precisely for these reasons that a stratification criterion such as economic status came to the fore, displacing belonging to a class first into the background, and then altogether from the list of significant stratification criteria.

The theory of elites arose and was formed largely as a reaction to radical and socialist teachings and was directed against various trends of socialism, primarily Marxist and anarchist.

The elite is not an exclusively political category, since in modern society there are also military, economic, and professional elites. We can say that there are as many elites as there are areas of social life. The position of the elite as a higher class or caste can be secured by formal law or religious code, or it can be achieved in a completely informal way. At the same time, the elite is always a minority opposed to the rest of society, that is, its middle and lower strata as a kind of “mass”.

There are two approaches to defining elites. According to the power approach, the elite are those who have decisive power in a given society. This approach is often called the line of Lasswell, who was one of the first to propose such an explanation. At its origins were also researchers such as Moek and Mills.

According to the meritocratic approach, the elite are those; who have certain special virtues and personal qualities, regardless of whether they have power or not. In the latter case, the elite is distinguished by talents and merits, as well as by the presence of charisma - the ability to lead people. This approach is called the Pareto line.

Elite theory provides an alternative explanation of social stratification to the Marxist approach. The Marxists' rejection of the provisions underlying the theory of elites is easily explained. First, recognizing that the lower strata are a weak or even unorganized mass that can and should be controlled would mean that this mass is incapable of self-organization and revolutionary action. Secondly, this would mean recognizing the inevitability and even “naturalness” of such sharp inequality.

Social stratification is a special dimension of social structure. If we consider society as a set of social institutions, including statuses and roles, then it turns out that all these elements are equal and differ from each other only in content, in terms of the functions that they perform. At the same time, inequality also plays a huge role in society. If social institutions, statuses and roles reflect the horizontal stratification of society, then inequality is the basis for its vertical stratification, that is, for social stratification.

There is no clear distinction between the horizontal and vertical dimensions. In essence, these are different approaches to describing the same facts. For example, we can consider a teacher and a school director from the point of view of the horizontal dimension, in which case they will be completely equal workers, and the differences between them will be reduced to differences in the functions they perform. The relationship between them can also be considered from the point of view of the vertical dimension. And in this case it will be different. Indeed, the school director is the boss, and the teacher is the subordinate; the social status (authority) of the school director is generally higher than the status (authority) of the teacher; a school director has greater access to socially prestigious benefits than a teacher, etc.

The term “stratification” came to sociology from geology, where it is used to describe how rock layers are arranged. A stratum in geology is a layer of earth that consists of homogeneous elements. It is this aspect of this concept that was borrowed by sociology: a stratum in sociology also includes people who are more or less similar in certain parameters.

However, the geological metaphor is not entirely acceptable in sociology, and therefore, as often happens, the concept, having moved from one science to another, acquired additional meanings. In particular, from the point of view of geology it is difficult to imagine that one layer moves relative to another, or that one component suddenly changes position and moves to another layer, but sociology constantly has to deal with this. For example, at present in our country the standard of living of teachers, including university teachers, has dropped significantly. And this process can only be understood as a shift to a lower layer of a fairly large group of people, which leads to a “redistribution of forces” in society, to a change in the overall picture.

Belonging to a stratum is determined in sociology on the basis of two groups of indicators: subjective and objective.

Subjective indicators are understood as a person’s feelings and thoughts associated with belonging to a particular social group. Objective indicators are indicators that are generally independent of human assessment and can be measured with greater or lesser accuracy. Objective indicators to a much greater extent reflect the generalized position of a person in the stratification system, that is, his position from the point of view of general, universal criteria for a given society.

There are four main parameters by which in modern society a person’s objective position in the stratification system is determined: income, education, power and prestige. Subjective and objective indicators do not always coincide. For example, the head of a criminal group may believe that he belongs to a higher stratum because he has a high income. And indeed, from the point of view of power and standard of living, this person belongs to the highest stratum. However, the parameters of education and prestige do not allow him to be placed at the top of the vertical classification. In European societies, criminal activity is condemned (although in our country there are many people who highly appreciate the position of a bandit); Most likely, this person’s education is also relatively low. Consequently, his position cannot be assessed as highly as he himself does.

Let us consider the main parameters by which a person’s objective position in the stratification system is determined.

Income is the amount of money an individual or family receives over a given period. The simplest way to calculate income is to recalculate it in certain monetary units (rubles, dollars, marks, etc.). In sociology, it is customary to distinguish conditional income levels, in relation to which population groups are distributed. For example, at the bottom of this classification there will be people whose monthly income is up to 1,000 rubles, then - people whose income is from 1,000 to 5,000 rubles, then - people earning up to 10,000 rubles, etc. The identification of such groups is conditional. In particular, people earning an average of 9,000 rubles a month rank much closer to those earning just over 10,000 rubles than to those earning 5,000 rubles, although the distribution by group does not reflect this. However, such a classification allows us to obtain and generalize important data about the vertical structure of society.

Education is another parameter that indicates a person's position. Currently, in European countries, the vast majority of people have secondary education; Only a few citizens receive higher education.

In fact, this parameter is expressed in the number of years that a person spent on training. Obtaining incomplete secondary education requires 8-9 years, while higher education a person has been spending 15-16 years, and a professor has been spending more than 21-22 years on his studies.

Power is a stratification parameter measured by the number of people subordinate to a person. The more subordinates a person has, the higher his status. For example, orders of the President Russian Federation 150 million people carry out the orders of the governor, several million, the orders of the plant director - from several hundred to several tens of thousands of people (depending on the number of employees), and the orders of the head of the department - on average from five to twenty people.

Finally, prestige is a parameter that reflects the “weight” (authority) that a person occupying a given status receives. For example, as studies have shown, in the United States the most prestigious professions are considered to be a college teacher, judge, doctor, lawyer, and the least prestigious are the professions of a janitor, shoe shiner, maid, plumber, etc. This list, by the way, probably differs from the opinion of citizens of our country. However, we can only speculate about the actual situation, since similar studies have not been conducted in Russia.

Prestige can be measured by examining how members of society evaluate certain professions. As a rule, in the process of such studies, people are offered a list of professions that they must evaluate on a certain scale. The data is then summarized and a figure is generated that reflects the average score.

There are many stratification criteria by which any society can be divided. Each of them is associated with special ways of determining and reproducing social inequality. The most well-known are the criteria underlying caste, slave, class and class differentiation, which are identified with historical types of social structure.

However, it can be argued that any society simultaneously involves several different stratification systems and many of their transitional forms that coexist with each other.

The following types of stratification are distinguished:

1. Physico-genetic stratification. It is based on the differentiation of social groups according to such “natural” socio-demographic characteristics as gender, age and the presence of certain physical qualities (strength, beauty, dexterity). Accordingly, weaker, physically handicapped people automatically occupy a lower place in the system. Inequality in this case is asserted by physical violence, and subsequently reinforced in customs and rituals.

2. Slave stratification is also based on direct violence. But the inequality of people here is determined by military-physical coercion. Social groups differ in the presence or absence of civil rights and property rights. With this stratification, certain social groups turn into an object of private property. This position is most often inherited and consolidated over generations. An example of slaveholding stratification is ancient slavery, as well as servitude in Rus'.

The methods of reproducing the slave system are characterized by significant diversity. Ancient slavery was maintained mainly through conquest. For early feudal Rus', debt and bonded slavery were more typical.

3. Caste stratification is based on ethnic differences, which are fixed by religious order and religious rituals. Each caste is a closed group that occupies a strictly defined place in the social hierarchy. There is a clear list defining the occupations that members of this caste can engage in (priestly, military, agricultural), as a result of which the isolation of this group increases even more. Position in the caste system is also inherited, and therefore, the phenomena of social mobility in systems organized according to this principle are practically not observed.

An example of a system dominated by caste stratification is India, where caste division was legally abolished only in 1950.

4. Class stratification. In this stratification system the groups are distinguished legal rights, which are strictly related to their responsibilities, which are legally enshrined obligations to the state. At a specific level, this is manifested in the fact that representatives of some classes are obliged to perform military service, others - bureaucratic service, etc. Thus, class is primarily a legal, rather than an economic division. Belonging to a class is also inherited, contributing to the relative closedness of this system.

An example of developed class systems are feudal Western European societies, as well as feudal Russia.

5. Etacratic stratification system (from Greek - state power). In it, differentiation between groups occurs according to their position in state hierarchies (political, military, economic), and all other differences (demographic, religious, ethnic, economic, cultural) play a secondary role. Stratification is thus associated in this case primarily with the formal ranks that these groups occupy in the corresponding power hierarchies. The scale and nature of differentiation (the scope of power) in an etacracy system are under the control of the state bureaucracy.

There are some similarities between the class and ethacratic systems, since hierarchies can be legally established through bureaucratic tables of ranks, military regulations, and the assignment of categories government agencies. However, they can remain outside the sphere state legislation. The ethacratic system is characterized by the formal freedom of members of society, who in fact depend only on the state, and the absence of automatic inheritance of positions of power, which distinguishes it from the class system.

A striking example of this stratification system is the system of the Soviet party nomenklatura, the principles of differentiation within which, as well as the principles of differentiation with other strata of society, were not enshrined in laws.

6. Socio-professional stratification system. Socio-professional division is the basic stratification system for societies with a developed division of labor. They play a special role in it qualification requirements requirements for a particular professional role, for example, having relevant experience, skills and abilities. In other words, in such a system, layers are distinguished primarily by the content and conditions of their work.

The approval and maintenance of hierarchical orders in this system is carried out with the help of certificates (diplomas, ranks, licenses, patents), fixing the level of qualifications and the ability to perform certain types of activities. The validity of such certificates is ensured by the power of the state or some other fairly powerful corporation (professional workshop).

This stratification system is not characterized by inheritance of membership in a layer; this is manifested in the fact that certificates are most often not inherited (although this pattern has some exceptions).

Examples include the construction of craft workshops medieval city, the rank grid in modern industry, the system of certificates and diplomas of education, the system of scientific degrees and titles, etc.

7. Class stratification system. Although the class approach is often contrasted with the stratification approach, we will consider class differentiation as one of the types of stratification. From the point of view of socio-economic interpretation, classes are social groups of politically and legally free citizens, the differences between which lie in the nature and extent of ownership of the means of production and the product produced, and, consequently, in the level of income received.

Belonging to classes is not regulated by higher authorities, is not established by law and is not inherited, which significantly distinguishes the class stratification system from all others. In this case, economic success automatically transfers a person to a higher group (although in fact there may be other restrictions).

It should be noted that the class division of society is often secondary in nature, subordinate to other methods of differentiating society into layers, and, therefore, its role in Marxist theory is noticeably overestimated. At least, the primacy of this method of division was characteristic only of bourgeois societies of the West and cannot be considered universal.

8. Cultural-symbolic stratification system. Differentiation arises in such a system based on differences in access to socially significant information and abilities and opportunities to be a bearer of sacred knowledge (mystical or scientific). Naturally, higher positions in the social hierarchy are occupied by those who have better opportunities to manipulate the consciousness and actions of other members of society, who have “better” symbolic capital.

In ancient times, this role was assigned to priests, magicians and shamans, in the Middle Ages - to church ministers, who made up the bulk of the literate population, interpreters of sacred texts, in modern times - to scientists and party ideologists (in many ways, in this position of scientists, the assertions of positivists that science will become a new religion). With some simplification, it can be argued that pre-industrial societies are more characterized by theocratic manipulation, industrial ones - by partocratic ones, while in post-industrial societies technocratic manipulation comes to the fore.

9. Cultural-normative stratification system. At the heart of such a system are differences in the degree of authority and prestige that arise as a result of comparisons of lifestyles and norms of behavior followed by a given person or group.

Social division can be based on such parameters as the nature of work (physical and mental work), habits, communication styles, consumer tastes, etiquette, language (for example, in the form of professional terminology or jargon). Typically, such differences allow group members to distinguish between in-groups and out-groups.

Social inequality in the world

Today, almost 40 percent of the world's funds are controlled by just 1 percent of the world's population. These data indicate that social and economic inequality continues to be entrenched today. Moreover, it is acquiring larger and larger proportions. This was stated recently by the administrator of the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), Helen Clark.

According to her research, only 8 percent of the population owns half of the world's income, of which 1 percent richest people of the world, which own 40 percent of all assets on the planet.

It must be said that such inequality existed before, but over the past twenty years its level has increased significantly. Thus, the economic gap between different social strata of the population in developing countries has increased by almost 11 percent and by 9 percent in countries that are considered economically developed.

However, in parallel with this, there are other statistics. Thus, thanks to the active development information technologies Over the past two weeks, poverty levels have been markedly reduced in many parts of the world. So, in those countries economic markets which are only in the process of their formation, it was possible to observe strong economic growth. And although this is a good trend in itself, the problem of inequality is still not able to be solved.

As UN experts say, such a greatly increased level of social and economic inequality contributes to the fact that the development of many countries of the world is greatly slowing down. Moreover, it is for this reason that economic progress stops, democracy loses its position and, thus, social harmony is disrupted.

It should be noted that the point is not only that different representatives of different classes receive unequal incomes. The problem is that their opportunities are also unequal. UN experts draw attention to the fact that in different countries of the world inequality is progressing in many indicators. So, for example, there is inequality between women and men, inequality between urban and rural residents. They receive completely different incomes, have different education, have different rights and opportunities, which simply cannot but affect their standard of living accordingly.

As the UN notes, the situation continues to get worse year after year.

Types of social inequality

The diversity of relationships, roles, and positions lead to differences between people in each particular society. The problem comes down to somehow ordering these relationships between categories of people that differ in many aspects.

In its most general form, inequality means that people live in conditions in which they have unequal access to limited resources for material and spiritual consumption.

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 engaged in economically heterogeneous labor, because such types of labor have different assessments of their social usefulness.

It is the socio-economic heterogeneity of labor that is not only a consequence, but also the reason for the appropriation of power, property, prestige by some people and the lack of all these signs of advancement in the social hierarchy by others. Each group develops its own values and norms and relies on them. If these groups are arranged hierarchically, then they are social layers.

There are such types of inequality:

1. Poverty as a type of inequality. The phenomenon of poverty became the subject of research in modern Russian sociology in the early 1990s. In the socio-economic literature, the category of poverty, which was revealed within the framework of the theory of welfare and socialist distribution, received official recognition. For the most part, these are working people over 28 years of age with higher or secondary specialized education. The most typical factors that determine the risk of ending up in one or another group of the poor include: loss of health, low level of qualifications, exclusion from the labor market, high family “burden” (large families, single-parent families, etc.); individual characteristics related to lifestyle, value orientations (reluctance to work, bad habits and so on.).

2. Deprivation as a type of inequality. Deprivation should be understood as any condition that gives or may give rise to an individual or group's feeling of being deprived in comparison with other individuals (or groups), or with an internalized set of standards. The feeling of deprivation can be either conscious, when individuals and groups experiencing deprivation can understand the reasons for their condition, or unconscious, when its true reasons are not clear. However, in both cases, deprivation is accompanied by a strong desire to overcome it.

Five types of deprivation can be distinguished:

Economic deprivation stems from the unequal distribution of income in society and the limited satisfaction of the needs of some individuals and groups. The degree of economic deprivation is assessed using objective and subjective criteria. An individual who, by objective criteria, is economically quite prosperous and even enjoys privileges, may nevertheless experience a subjective feeling of deprivation;
- social deprivation - is explained by the tendency of society to evaluate the qualities and abilities of some individuals and groups higher than others, expressing this assessment in the distribution of such social rewards as prestige, power, high status in society and corresponding opportunities for participation in social life. The reasons for such unequal assessment can be very diverse. Social deprivation usually complements economic deprivation: the less a person has in material terms, the lower his social status, and vice versa;
- ethical deprivation - it is associated with a value conflict that arises when the ideals of individuals or groups do not coincide with the ideals of society. These types of conflicts can arise for many reasons. Some people may feel the internal contradiction of the generally accepted value system, the presence of negative latent functions of established standards and rules, they may suffer due to the discrepancy between reality and ideals, etc. Often a value conflict arises due to the presence of contradictions in social organization;
- mental deprivation - arises as a result of the formation of a value vacuum in an individual or group - the absence meaningful system values according to which they could build their lives. This is predominantly the result of an acute state of social deprivation that has not been resolved over a long period of time, when a person, as a spontaneous mental compensation for his condition, loses his commitment to the values of a society that does not recognize him. A common reaction to mental deprivation is the search for new values, new faith, meaning and purpose of existence. A person experiencing a state of mental deprivation, as a rule, is most susceptible to new ideologies, mythologies, and religions.

Inequality is a natural difference in the condition of members of modern society. Inequality is consolidated in any society, and a system of norms is created according to which people must be included in relations of inequality, accept these relations, and not oppose them.

FEDERAL AGENCY FOR EDUCATION

STATE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION OF HIGHER PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION

……………………………………

Department UP-1

Sociology homework

“SOCIAL INEQUALITY, ITS CAUSES AND TYPES”

Student: …………………………

080504 - State and municipal administration

1st year, gr. UP-1

Checked:

……………………….

Introduction………………………………………………………………………………..….. 3

1. The essence of social inequality……………………………..………..4

2. Causes of social inequality…………………………………………...5

3. Modern types of inequality……………………………………..……….8

Conclusion……………………………………………………………...………..11

References……………………………………………………………..12

INTRODUCTION

The formation of “New Russia” noticeably changed social relations, social institutions, and gave rise to new forms of social differentiation and inequality.

Discussions about social inequality, its content and criteria for its occurrence have a long history. The problem of social inequality, taking into account the values of traditional society, appears in the works of Aristotle, Plato, Tacitus.

In my opinion, in modern world Indicators characterizing social inequality must be continuously monitored and assessed. This is necessary for one reason - the degree of social inequality may exceed certain acceptable limits. Exceeding the permissible degree of inequality leads to a large difference in the standard of living of individual status groups in society, which can be regarded as discrimination and infringement of certain groups of the population. This fact often leads to social tension in society and aggravates social conflicts.

The object of my research is society, and the subject is the study of inequality.

Since my essay is devoted to the problem of inequality in society, my task is to determine the essence and causes of social inequality, as well as to consider the types of social inequality.

1. THE ESSENCE OF SOCIAL INEQUALITY

To begin with, I would like to define what the term “inequality” means? In general terms, inequality means that people live in conditions in which they have unequal access to resources for material and spiritual consumption. And inequality between groups of people is characterized by the concept of “social stratification.”

When considering the problem of social inequality, it is fair to proceed from the theory of socio-economic heterogeneity of labor. It is the socio-economic heterogeneity of labor that is the consequence and cause of the appropriation of power, property, prestige by some people and the absence of all these signs of “advancement” in the social hierarchy by others. Each of the groups develops and relies on its own values and norms, and if they are placed according to a hierarchical principle, then they are social layers.

In social stratification there is a tendency to inherit positions. The principle of inheritance of positions leads to the fact that not all capable and educated individuals have equal chances to occupy positions of power, high principles and well-paid positions. There are two selection mechanisms at work here: unequal access to truly high-quality education; unequal opportunities for equally qualified individuals to obtain positions.

I would like to note that the inequality of position of different groups of people can be traced throughout the history of civilization. Even in primitive societies, age and gender, combined with physical strength, were important criteria for stratification.

2. CAUSES OF SOCIAL INEQUALITY

Some representatives of sociological thought believe that the main reason for the unequal position of people in society is the social division of labor. However, scientists explain in different ways the ensuing consequences and, especially, the reasons for the reproduction of inequality.

Herbert Spencer believes that the source of inequality is conquest. Thus, the ruling class is the winners, and the lower class is the losers. Prisoners of war become slaves, free farmers become serfs. On the other hand, frequent or constant wars lead to the deliberate dominance of those who function in the state and military sphere. Thus, the law of natural selection operates: the stronger dominate and occupy a privileged position, while the weak are subordinate to them and are on the lower steps of the social ladder.

The development of the sociology of inequality, the idea of evolution and the law of natural selection had a significant influence. One of the directions of evolutionism is social Darwinism. What all representatives of this trend had in common was the recognition that the same struggle is going on between human societies as between biological organisms.

Ludwig Gumplowicz is convinced that the cause of any social movement is economic motives. The means to realize these interests are violence and coercion. States arise as a result of military clashes between races. The winners become the elite (ruling class), and the vanquished become the masses.

William Sumner is the most influential Social Darwinist. He uniquely interpreted the ideas of Protestant ethics and the principle of natural selection in his works. He most clearly demonstrated the ideology of social Darwinism in his writings of the 70s. Since evolution does not occur at the will of people, it is therefore stupid and absurd to design models of society, Sumner believed. The struggle for existence and survival is a natural law of nature that does not need to be changed. And capitalism is the only healthy system, the rich are a product of natural selection.

Karl Marx believed that initially the division of labor does not lead to the subordination of some people by others, but, being a factor in the mastery of natural resources, causes professional specialization. But the increasing complexity of the production process contributes to the division of labor into physical and mental. This division historically preceded the formation of private property and classes. With their appearance, certain areas, types and functions of activity are assigned to the corresponding classes. From this time on, each class is engaged in its assigned occupation, owns or does not own property, and is located on different rungs of the ladder of social status. The causes of inequality lie in the system of production, in the different attitudes towards the means of production, which allows those who own property not only to exploit those who do not have it, but also to dominate them. To eliminate inequality, it is necessary to expropriate private property and its nationalization.

Subsequently, within the framework of conflict theory, R. Dahrendorf, R. Mikels, C.R. Mills and others began to view inequality as the result of the conditions under which people who control social values such as wealth and power derive benefits and advantages for themselves. In any case, social stratification is seen as a condition of social tension and conflict.

Proponents of structural functionalism, following Emile Durkheim, identify two causes of social inequality

Hierarchy of activities Degree of talent

in a society of individuals

Of decisive importance for the formation of modern ideas about the essence, forms and functions of social inequality, along with Marx, was Max Weber (1864 - 1920), a classic of world sociological theory. The ideological basis of Weber's views is that the individual is the subject of social action.

In contrast to Marx, Weber, in addition to the economic aspect of stratification, took into account such aspects as power and prestige. Weber viewed property, power, and prestige as three separate, interacting factors that underlie hierarchies in any society. Differences in ownership give rise to economic classes; differences related to power give rise to political parties, and differences of prestige give rise to status groupings, or strata. From here he formulated his idea of “three autonomous dimensions of stratification.” He emphasized that “classes”, “status groups” and “parties” are phenomena related to the distribution of power within a community.

Weber's main contradiction with Marx is that, according to Weber, a class cannot be a subject of action, since it is not a community. In contrast to Marx, Weber associated the concept of class only with capitalist society, where the most important regulator of relations is the market. Through it, people satisfy their needs for material goods and services.

However, in the market people occupy different positions or are in different “class situations”. Everything is bought and sold here. Some sell goods and services; others - labor. The difference here is that some people own property while others do not. Weber does not have a clear class structure of capitalist society, so different interpreters of his works give different lists of classes.

Taking into account his methodological principles and summarizing his historical, economic and sociological works, we can reconstruct Weber's typology of classes under capitalism as follows:

Working class deprived of property. He offers on the market

its services and is differentiated by skill level.

petty bourgeoisie- a class of small businessmen and traders.

Dispossessed white collar workers: technical specialists and intellectuals.

Administrators and managers.

Owners, who also strive through education for the advantages that intellectuals possess.

5.1 Owner class, i.e. those who receive rent from land ownership,

mines, etc.

5.2 “Commercial class”, i.e. entrepreneurs.

3. MODERN TYPES OF INEQUALITY

3.1. Poverty as a type of inequality (let’s consider the period when changes in this area were especially noticeable)

The phenomenon of poverty became the subject of research in modern Russian sociology in the early 1990s. During the Soviet period, the concept of poverty in relation to Soviet people was not used in domestic science. In the socio-economic literature, the category of poverty, which was revealed within the framework of the theory of welfare and socialist distribution, received official recognition.

Today, an important characteristic of society is its social polarization, stratification into the poor and the rich. In 1994 per capita cash ratio The income of the richest 10% and the poorest 10% of Russians was 1:9, and already in the first quarter of 1995 it was almost 1:15. However, these figures do not take into account the 5% of the super-rich population, about which statistics do not have data.

According to official statistics, for 1993-1996. number of unemployed increased from 3.6 million to 6.5 million (including those officially registered with the state employment service - from 577.7 thousand people to 2506 thousand).

Working-age population amounted to 83,767 thousand in 1994, 84,059 thousand in 1995, 84,209 thousand in 1996, 84,337 thousand in 1997, 84,781 thousand in 1998. Human.

Economically active population in 1994 amounted to 73,962.4 thousand, in 1995 - 72,871.9 thousand, in 1996 - 73,230.0 thousand, in 1997 - 72,819 thousand people.

Number of people with incomes below the subsistence level is 30.7 million or 20.8% of the population of the Russian Federation. IN

1997, the 10% of the richest population accounted for 31.7% of cash income, while the 10% of the least affluent population accounted for only 2.4%, i.e. 13.2 times less.

According to official statistics, the number of unemployed was 5478.0 thousand in 1994, 6431.0 thousand in 1995, 7280.0 thousand in 1996, 8180.3 thousand in 1997 .

3.2.Deprivation as a type of inequality.

Deprivation should be understood as any condition that gives rise or may give rise to an individual or group feeling of their own deprivation in comparison with other individuals (or groups). Five types of deprivation can be distinguished.

Economic deprivation.

It arises from the uneven distribution of income in society and the limited satisfaction of the needs of some individuals and groups. The degree of economic deprivation is assessed using objective and subjective criteria. An individual who, according to objective criteria, is economically quite prosperous and even enjoys privileges, may nevertheless experience a subjective feeling of deprivation. For the emergence of religious movements, the subjective feeling of deprivation is the most important factor.

Social deprivation.

It is explained by the tendency of society to value the qualities and abilities of some individuals and groups higher than others, expressing this assessment in the distribution of such social rewards as prestige, power, high status in society and corresponding opportunities for participation in social life.

Ethical deprivation.

It is associated with a value conflict that arises when the ideals of individuals or groups do not coincide with the ideals of society. Often a value conflict arises due to the presence of contradictions in social organization. Such conflicts between society and intellectuals are known.

Mental deprivation.

It arises as a result of the formation of a value vacuum in an individual or group - the absence of a significant value system in accordance with which they could build their life. A common reaction to mental deprivation is the search for new values, new faith, meaning and purpose of existence. Mental deprivation manifests itself, first of all, in a feeling of despair, alienation, and a state of anomie, resulting from objective states of deprivation (social, economic or organismic). It often results in actions aimed at eliminating objective forms of deprivation.

Conclusion

In its most general form, inequality means that people live in conditions in which they have unequal access to limited resources for material and spiritual consumption. To describe the system of inequality between groups of people in sociology, the concept of “social stratification” is widely used.

It is the socio-economic heterogeneity of labor that is not only a consequence, but also the reason for the appropriation of power, property, prestige by some people and the absence of all these signs of “advancement” in the social hierarchy by others.

Social stratification has a traditional character, since despite the historical mobility of its form, its essence, that is, the inequality of position of different groups of people, is preserved throughout the history of civilization. Even in primitive societies, age and sex, combined with physical strength, were important criteria for stratification.

Considering the dissatisfaction of members of society with the existing system of distribution of power, property and conditions for individual development, it is still necessary to keep in mind the universality of human inequality.

Bibliography

Goffman A. B. Seven lectures on the history of sociology. M., 1995.

Zborovsky G. E. Orlov G. P. Sociology. M., 1995.

Komarov M. S. Introduction to sociology. M., 1995.

Komarova. M.S. Social stratification and social structure. Sociol. research 1992, no. 7.

A brief dictionary of sociology. - M.: Politizdat, 1988

Losev A. F. History of ancient aesthetics Vol. II Sophists Socrates. Plato. M., 1969

Fundamentals of political science: Course of lectures. Textbook for universities / N. Sazonov, B. Reshetnyak and others - M., 1993.

Subject and structure of sociological science, sociological research, 1981.№-1.p.90.

Sociology. Textbook for higher educational institutions. G.V. Osipov, A.V. Kabyshcha, M.R. Tulchinsky and others - M.: Nauka, 1995.

Sociology: General course: Textbook for universities.-M.: PER SE; Logos, 2000.

Sociology: Workshop. Comp. and resp. ed. A. V. Mironov, R. I. Rudenko. M., 1993.

The structure of social stratification and trends in social mobility // American Sociology / Transl. from English V.V. Voronina and E.E. Zinkovsky. M.: Progress, 1972. P. 235-247.

Philosophical Dictionary, 1991, - ed. I.T. Frolova.

Sociology: textbook / Ed. N.D. Kazakova. – M.: MGUPI, 2008. – 120 p.

Social inequality appeared in primitive tribes and intensified in subsequent stages of social development.

In modern society, there are large social groups that differ in income (wealth), level of education, profession and nature of work. They are called classes, social strata.

There is a social division in society into groups of the rich (upper class), wealthy (middle class), and poor (lower class).

The rich, upper class includes those who own a lot of property and money. They are on the top rung of the social “ladder”, receive large incomes, have large property (oil companies, commercial banks, etc.). A person can become rich thanks to talent and hard work, receiving an inheritance, or a successful career.

Between the rich and the poor there is a middle class of wealthy, wealthy people in cash. They maintain a decent standard of living, allowing them to satisfy all reasonable needs (purchase quality food, expensive clothing, housing).

The poor - the lower class - receive a minimum income in the form of wages, pensions, stipends, social benefits. With this money you can purchase only the smallest amount of essentials necessary to maintain human health and life (food, clothing, etc.).

Let's imagine that all people are socially equal. Universal equality deprives people of incentives to move forward, the desire to exert maximum effort and ability to perform duties (people will believe that they get no more for their work than they would get if they did nothing all day).

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 poor and rich, educated and uneducated, enterprising and non-entrepreneurial, those with 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 view social inequality as injustice.

The German economist K. Marx associated social inequality with the emergence of private property and the struggle of interests of various classes and social groups.

American sociologist T. Pierson 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 technological scientists, plant directors, etc. have higher status and income, while in Europe the dominant value is “preservation of cultural patterns”, due to what society gives special prestige to intellectuals in the humanities, clergy, and university professors.

The problem of social inequality is one of the most acute and pressing in modern Russia. A feature of the social structure of Russian society is strong social polarization - the division of the population into poor and rich in the absence of a significant middle layer, which serves as 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 opportunities for independent self-realization and improvement of social status are limited for a fairly large part of the Russian population.

Causes of social inequality

Ideas about social stratification

Social inequalities in society

Causes of social inequality

The problem of social inequality

Inequality of social groups

Social inequality of people

Level of social inequality

Examples of social inequality

Socio-economic inequality

Structured social inequality

Social income inequality

Concept of social inequality

Theories of social inequality

Social inequality in the world

Types of social inequality

You might be interested