CLASSISM
Stratification
Founding Fathers
No Oligarchy=Aristocracy
The Few v The Many
No Ruling Class
Elitism v Democracy
Critical overview
Social stratification is regarded quite differently by the principal perspectives of sociology. Proponents of structural-functional analysis suggest that since social stratification exists in all societies, a hierarchy must therefore be beneficial in helping to stabilize their existence. Conflict theorists consider the inaccessibility of resources and lack of social mobility in many stratified societies. They conclude, often working from the theories of Karl Marx, that stratification means that working class people are not likely to advance socioeconomically, while the wealthy may continue to exploit the proletariat generation after generation. "The advancement in technology have change the structure of mobility completely" (Francois Adley). However, some conflict theorists, mainly Weber and his followers also critique Marx's view and point out at that social stratification is not purely based on economic inequalities but is equally shaped by status and power differentials. They proceed to examine the basis and structure of stratification in society along all of the three axes.
Though often considered incredible, Anthropologists have confirmed that social stratification is not universal as once thought. Non-stratified egalitarian societies exist which have little or no concept of social hierarchy, political or economic status, class, or even permanent leadership
his page was last modified 02:03, 6 June 2006. All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License (see Copyrights for details).
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.