Inequality
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Inequality

on

  • 2,482 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
2,482
Views on SlideShare
2,481
Embed Views
1

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
37
Comments
0

1 Embed 1

http://www.slideshare.net 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Inequality Inequality Presentation Transcript

  • Ten Questions: A Sodological Perspective 68 T ~ rquot;1~ C~ ,i I Shibutani, Tamotsu 1955 ~Reference Groups as Perspectives.quot; dl l ':1': American Journal ofSociology, 60: 562-569. II Shibutani, Tamotsu 1961 Society and Personality: An Interactionist :11 quot;I: Approach to Social Psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. if Why Are People :Ii Shibutani, Tamotsu 1986 Social Processes: An Introduction to Sociology. :1: Unequal in Society? 'II· Berkeley: University of California Press. ,I: Shils, Edward S., and Morris Janowitz 1948 quot;Cohesion and The Origin and Perpetuation of Social Inequality Ii Disintegration in the Wehrmacht in World War II.quot; Public Opinion I~i Quarur~, 12:280-294. H, !: Slmmel, Georg 1950 The Sociology ofGeorg Simmel. Ed. Kurt W. Wolff. New York: Free Press. Skolnick, Arlene, and Jerome Skolnick 1992 Family in Transition. 7th ed. New York: HarperCollins. Spindler, George, Louise Spindler, Henry T. Trueba, and Melvin D. Williams 1990 The American Cultural Dialogue and Its Transmission. Introduction Bristol, PA: Falmer Press. In the view of Voltaire, the French eighteenth-century philosopher, Strauss, Anselm L. 1978 Negotiations: Contexts, Processes and Social ~It is because the very nature of society creates inequality that the Order. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. purpose of government must be to work for equality.quot; Voltaire Sumner, William Graham 1906 Folkways. 1940 ed. Boston: Ginn and yearned for the equality of all humans, but he recognized that his Company. goal was difficult precisely because we all live in societies, and soci­ Sykes, Gresham M., and Sheldon L. Messinger 1960 ~The Inmate eties necessarily create inequality. Sociologists are generally in Social System.quot; Theoretical Studies in Social Organization ofthe Prison. Pamphlet 15. New York: Social Science Research Council. agreement with Voltaire, and they are driven to understand more Szasz, Thomas 1986 The Myth ofMental Illness. Rev. ed. New York: completely why he is right. Harper and Row. Sociologists have been interested in inequality since the very Toennies, Ferdinand 1887 Community and Society. 1957 ed. Trans. beginning of their discipline. It was the central theme of all Marx's and ed. Charles A. Loomis. East Lansing: Michigan State University work. Much of what Max Weber examined involved inequality. In­ Press. deed, the workS of almost every great sociologist contain an ap ­ Warriner, Charles K. 1970 The Emergence ofSociety. Homewood, IL: proach to the subject. Dorsey Press. Most people ask questions about inequality, and people who Weber, Max 1905 The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit ofCapitalism. 1958 seek a just world almost always identify it as a source of injustice. In ed. Trans. and ed. Talcott Parsons. New York: Scribner's. fact, this problem probably brings more thinking and caring people Wheelan, Susan A. 1994 Group Processes: The Developmental Perspective. to study sociology than any other problem. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Every time we interact with one another, inequality emerges in White, Leslie A. 1940 The Science ofCulture. New York: Farrar, Straus some form or another. Individual qualities, for example, not only and Giroux. will differentiate us from one another, but also often become the Whyte, William F. 1949 ~The Social Structure of the Restaurant.quot; basis for inequality between us. We will be unequally handsome, American Sociological Review, 54: 302-310. intelligent, outgoing, talented in athletics, and even cool. Where Wilson, Bryan 1982 Religion in Sociological Perspective. New York: Oxford University Press. such qualities matter, inequality will exist. When we compare our­ selves on more social qualities, we will see many others as richer, Wrong, Dennis H. 1994 The Problem of Order: What Unites and Divides Society. New York: Free Press. more successful, or more friendly. It is hard to escape inequality and Wuthnow, Robert 1987 Meaning and Moral Order: Explorations in the perception of inequality in our lives. Cultural Analysis. Berkeley: University of California Press. 69
  • 70 Ten Questions: A Sociological Perspective 71 Chapter Four Why Are People Unequal in Society? The United States is a society dedicated to a democratic ideal power in certain matters, as do the American Medical Association that includes equal opportunity for all. Yet if we are honest, we find and the National Association of Manufacturers. Political parties are it difficult to ignore the great inequalities that persist and cause us to rich or poor. Some churches survive on a few funds, whereas other fall short of our ideal. In 1993, for example, the wealthiest one-fifth of churches are very wealthy. the population received 44% of the income, whereas the poorest three­ Why does inequality exist? Whereas most of us are tempted to fifths received 30% of all income (estimate based on U.S. Bureau of answer this in terms of human nature, biological superiority or infe­ the Census, 1995). riority, supernatural forces, or a just free-market system, sociologists Total wealth is much more difficult to measure, but there is gen­ will, of course, look at the nature of our social life. To understand eral agreement that it is even more unequal. In 1995, the wealthiest inequality among people in society, it is necessary to understand so­ 10% owned 68% of the total wealth in the United States (Beeghley, cial organization itself, to see social inequality as a central quality in 1996); in fact the richest 1% of the population owned 42 % of the society, to see social forces at work that make it almost inevitable in total wealth in 1986 (U.S. Congress, Joint Economic Committee, human life. The sociologist will generally examine two aspects of 1986). According to one estimate based on 1990 Federal Reserve the problem: data, the net worth of the top 1% of the U.S. population was greater First, the reasons why inequality arises in the first place. than the net worth of the bottom 90% (Kennickell and Woodbum, 1992). And John J. Macionis (1997:263) estimates that quot;the one Second, how inequality is perpetuated over time-why, dozen richest U.S. families have a combined net worth approaching once established, it tends to continue in society, and thus $150 billion, which equals the total wealth of 1 million average fam­ why it is so difficult to limit its development or alter its ilies.... quot; We should add here that the bottom 40% of the popula­ importance. tion has no net worth at all because it owes more than it makes It should be evident that the sociological approach to inequality (ibid.). There also seems to be a trend making wealth differences involves the creation of social structure in society. Social structure is even greater, although that trend has probably become less severe a social pattern that involves unequal ranks; thus, wherever it de­ in the 1990s; for example, in the 20 years between 1963 and 1983, velops, a permanent system of inequality is established, and individ­ the average wealth of the wealthiest 10% rose 147%, compared uals become ranked throughout society and throughout every social with 45% for the rest of the population (U.S. Congress, Joint Eco­ organization. It is, therefore, not the nature of human beings that nomic Committee, 1986). create inequality, nor is it natural superiority or inferiority, or su­ Much of what sociology has done is to understand and docu­ pernatural forces, so much as it is social interaction and the creation ment the various types of inequality. It is not an easy task. Weber of social patterns. In a sense, sociologists take a view that maintains writes that we are unequal in three orders, or arenas in society: the that so long as people have to live in society-and that seems to be economic order, the social order, and the political order. We might our essence-inequality will be a central part of life. Even Karl translate this into class (economic order); race, occupation, educa­ Marx, who dreamed and predicted a world of equality someday, saw tion, gender, and ethnic group membership (social order); and polit­ its possibility only with the disappearance of society and its perma­ ical position (political order). Furthermore, sociologists point out, nent social patterns. within every organization from university to place of employment we also enter positions that are unequal. Even when we interact in Why Does Inequality Emerge in the First Place? small groups or even with one other person, we develop a system in which our informal positions are almost always unequal. In groups, As people come in contact with one another they generally inter­ there are leaders, followers, and even scapegoats. Similarly, we find act-they take one another into account as they act. For some rea­ differences between organizations of people: Management in a cor­ son, this social interaction develops social patterns. Once created, poration is more or less powerful than a labor union. Harvard and these patterns hang on. One of these patterns is social structure. So­ Stanford have more prestige-sometimes even more power-than cial structure is almost always a system of inequality, so that is what most other universities. The National Rifle Association has great we need to focus our attention on.
  • Chapter Four Why Are People Unequal in Society? 73 Ten Questions: A Sociological Perspective 72 Marx focuses almost entirely on the economic division of labor. Marx is a good place to begin. Marx emphasized the central im­ but division of labor can be broadened to include other types of ac­ portance of social structure. But why does it arise as people come tivities. Division of labor and therefore inequality can be found in together? Why does inequality have to emerge? Marx describes families, in friendship groups, in schools. in politics, in churches­ three basic reasons: indeed, wherever there is a social organization. We might notice di­ vision of labor will exist in such places because a division will arise 1. The division of labor between those who lead and those who follow. As an organization 2. Social conflict becomes large or complex (differentiated in functions), someone 3. The existence of private property. arises to make sure that events go smoothly, to take care of day-to­ day decision making, and to guarantee that the organization works To Marx, so long as a society develops these three qualities, inequal­ to achieve its goals. Indeed, such individuals are often necessary to ity will exist in society. Marx's explanation is not all that needs to be represent the interests of the organization in relation to other orga­ understood, but it is a good place to begin. nizations. Coordination of activities and successful achievement of goals normally means having a leader or set of leaders. Once leader­ Division ofLabor and the Rise of Unequal Power ship positions are created, a division of labor has been established. But why will this necessarily bring inequality? Robert Michels It is important to note that almost every sociologist who tries to ex­ (1876-1936) explains this; in the process. he adds to Marx's expla­ plain inequality brings in quot;the division of labor.quot; To Marx this is cen­ nation and to the importance of division of labor. Michels looks at tral. As a division of labor arises in society-that is, as people this as an inevitable process: Once the leader is chosen in any orga­ increasingly do different things-some of these activities give some nization (and it does not seem to matter how), certain forces are set people advantages over others. Some activities are more valued, in motion to give the leader advantages over everyone else. In fact, some allow for control over others, some give people advantages in leadership usually centers on a small number of individuals, who the way they live their lives, some lead to increasing accumulation Michels calls the elite. Positions of leadership give the elite great ad­ of advantages over time. If one person farms and others do not, then vantages: more information about the organization. the right to the others become increasingly dependent on that one. And if one make decisions on a day-to-day basis, and control over what others person farms successfully (through skill, luck, exploitation, or cheat­ in the organization know. Over time these members of the elite sep­ ing), then that farmer is able to accumulate economic resources­ arate themselves from the rest in the organization, and they pur­ for example, land, laborers, and capital-that give him or her posely create ways to hold onto their positions. Those who are not advantages over those with fewer of these resources. More impor­ leaders eventually become less and less capable of criticizing the tant, if the farmer is able to employ workers (a division of labor), a leadership-and less and less willing. Whoever enters these posi­ system of inequality begins in earnest. To Marx, the employer con­ tions in the future will enter positions that are inherently more pow­ trols employees, the boss exploits his or her workers, gains at their erful. Michels's pessimism concerning the possibility of equality in expense, and becomes increasingly wealthy and powerful in rela­ organization has been called quot;the Iron Law of Oligarchy.quot; which tion to them. The employer over time is able to consolidate a fa­ means that wherever organization exists, so will a few people who vored position, and advantages accumulate. Once this process begins have power in relation to everyone else. To say quot;organizationquot; is to in society, it cannot be easily stopped. Division of labor itself en­ say the rule by a few, whether we call it a democracy or a dictator­ courages social inequality, and division of labor that involves em­ ship. In the end, this division of labor itself means inequality in power. ployers and employees is especially important. Michels tries to identify some of the conditions that seem to in­ If everyone essentially performs the same tasks-there is no im­ crease the division of labor. As numbers rise in organization, for ex­ portant distinctions in what people do in society-significant social ample, informal interaction usually gives way to formal attempts by inequality will not arise. If no one is employer and no one the em­ leaders to coordinate activities. In addition, conflict with other orga­ ployee, then equality will characterize that society.
  • 74 Ten Questions: A Sociological Perspective 75 Chapter Four Why Are People Unequal in Society? nizations encourages centralization of power and division of labor as thority exists in every modern society as well as in almost every or­ ways of surviving and maintaining internal order. ganization within modern society. A bureaucratic authority struc­ This process is complicated, however. Although increasing the ture will exist whenever we enter an organization, and we will all division of labor normally creates greater inequality, at a certain fill positions within that structure and have more or less power than point other factors enter in and work for greater equality. In the so­ others in that structure. In this sense, social inequality is created on ciety's economic development, for example, Gerhard Lenski shows purpose by people who want to organize other people to get work us that as society moves from an agrarian to an industrialized state­ done. and therefore to a greater division of labor-there is actually greater Weber saw bureaucracy as a system of organization that would equality. This happens because industrialization demands a more come to dominate the twentieth century, and, if we look around, knowledgeable population, a more technically skilled work force. we can see how right he was. Almost every large organization we The elite needs more help in leading society, and part of the cost is enter is another example of bureaucracy. Weber's brilliant analysis sharing wealth and power. Lenski never claims that inequality ends, of bureaucracy reminds us of some central points: (1) Bureaucracy only that in industrialization inequality is tempered by a recognition is a system of organization set up on purpose to get things done as by those at the top that to protect their position and for society to efficiently as possible. (2) Bureaucracy is a system of inequality cre­ progress economically, there must be some sharing of wealth and ated so that responsibilities and lines of authority are clearly distrib­ power. In fact, it well may be that dependence on other classes uted. Obedience to authority is a central value. (3) Bureaucracy is a within one's own society is less and less important to economic elites in form of organization whose inequality is regarded by actors as nec­ the modern world, and that we have come to a point where sharing essary and legitimate. It is a system of control carefully created to of wealth and power in society is no longer necessary for economic ensure that the commands of the few are carried out by the many. progress. Increasing division of labor may simply bring greater and (4) Once formed, bureaucracy is almost impossible to dismantle be­ greater inequality. cause the division of labor becomes a necessary tool to achieve the Sometimes a division of labor is created on purpose, and a sys­ goals of the organization, and because those at the top have the tem of inequality exists from the very beginning of organization. means to control other people in ways unimagined in other types of When one society conquers another and a new social structure is set organization. up, almost always a structure purposely places the losing group into Almost every classical sociologist underlines the importance of positions different and lower from those who have won. Slavery the division of labor for the creation of inequality. An organization and colonialism in the nineteenth century are two examples of this. in which there are no leaders or a society in which everyone does In fact, when people come together in order to create their own the same tasks seems like an impossible dream (or nightmare). The organization-a business, a club, a league of sports teams, for ex­ trick is to create a division of labor that has equal positions, and this ample-a division of labor is created on purpose, and along with it seems to be impossible. an explicit and clear system of inequality. A new business will set up a board of directors with a president, a vice-president, and so on. Social Conflict and the Rise of Unequal Power A new restaurant will open with a manager, an assistant manager, a head waiter, and a chief bottle washer. Weber describes this system Thus far we have focused on the division of labor as an explanation of inequality as ~legal-rationalw or quot;bureaucratic authority,quot; the for inequality. Marx introduces us to a second source: social conflict. intentional ranking of positions in terms of social power in organi­ Conflict means the struggle by actors over something of value. zation. What is the purpose of doing this? Weber's answer is effi­ Where there is struggle, some actors win and some lose, or, in most ciency: In the modern world, because efficiency is so important in cases, some simply get more of what they want than others. Conflict organization, people will purposely create what they consider to be occurs when there is scarcity: Not everyone can obtain what he or a rational system of inequality to ensure that a clear and efficient di­ she wants because there is simply not enough to go around. Conflict vision of power and responsibility is established. To Weber, such au­ also occurs when some people monopolize what is valued in soci­
  • Ten Questions: A Sociological Perspective 77 Chapter Four Why Are People Unequal in Society? 76 ety, and, as a result, others are denied. In either case, scarcity or un­ thus making life easier and increasing their wealth. We might truth­ equal distribution is the result as some increase their possessions fully maintain that the system of inequality protects the favored posi­ and others cannot. tion of the powerful, increases their competitive edge, and allows them Victory in conflict is explained best by understanding the role of to exploit those who are in less powerful positions. power: Those who win have more power than their opposition and Imagine the world as a place of continuous social conflict: All are therefore able to win in the interaction. This might be personal individuals, groups, organizations, and societies are struggling for power (based on intelligence, strength, attractiveness, guns, or whatever is valued. As some win, others lose, and over time a fairly wealth, for example). Often it is an organization, group, or society permanent system of inequality emerges. Some will be rich, some that enters into conflict and wins through superior power (better ef: poor; some will be powerful, some powerless. An upper class ficiency, greater loyalty among members, better technology, better emerges, and a poor class develops. Men rather than women come leaders, or more weapons or wealth, for example). to control the economic and political order, and all kinds of laws, When there is conflict and some people begin to win, they are ideas, customs, and institutions arise that continue that control. able to achieve their goals better than the opposition. They are Whites dominate nonwhites, and Protestants dominate Catholics. In normally able to build on their victory and increase their advan­ each case a stable system of inequality is created that favors the pow­ tage over others, which in turn allows them to build up even erful. This happens in every organization and group. Individuals en­ greater power. Eventually, those who win are able to create a sys­ gage in conflict in newly formed groups, from juries to clubs to study tem of inequality, a social structure where they are at the top, and a groups to families. In each case, as people win, they are able to es­ culture and set of institutions that work to protect them. This sys­ tablish ways of protecting their interests. In short, the victors in so­ tem of inequality helps to ensure that they (as well as their group dal conflict are normally able to ensure their favored position. and their descendants) will continue in this advantaged position. The clearest examples are instances of extreme domination. Victory becomes institutionalized; that is, it becomes established in Until recently, South Africa had been characterized by laws, cus­ the way society operates. Those who win create a system that helps toms, and ideas that openly declared the separation of the races and to guarantee their continued success. Thus, the Europeans come excluded blacks from equal participation in society and from equal to America, conquer the Native American population, and estab­ protection by the law. Such was also the case with American slav­ lish a treaty and reservation system that guarantees continued ery. To different degrees, Christian, Jewish, and Muslim societies ownership of the land and subservience by the Native American have always had a strict code governing the actions of men and people. Two businesses compete for a market. One eventually women, a code in which women have been systematically excluded moves ahead in that competition, and over time the one that is from full participation in the political, educational, religious, and ahead attempts to protect that favored position through instituting economic orders. When the Nazis came to power in Germany, they a distribution system, a pricing system, and an advertising program made it illegal for Jewish people to hold decent jobs, passed laws that will continue its domination of the market. Normally, the stripping Jews of citizenship, and took over Jewish property. They result is a fairly permanent system of inequality between those eventually established an organized system of resettling the German businesses. Jews in concentration camps, where the vast majority were system­ Building a permanent system of inequality is advantageous to atically murdered. the dominant group in several ways. First it protects the advantages Donald Noel (1968) highlights the role of conflict in his theory the group already has. Thus, a system of law and government, if it is of the origin of ethnic stratification. Three conditions are necessary. heavily influenced by the rich and powerful, will help protect their First, groups that have separate cultures and identities come to­ property and their privileges against others in society. Second, it gether. Second, there is competition for a scarce resource, or there is places the dominant group in a favorable competitive position for an opportunity for the exploitation of one group by the other (both jobs, education, and housing. Third, it allows members of the elite are examples of conflict). Third, one group has more power than to use those in lower positions as laborers, renters, and consumers, the other and is able to exert itself successfully in the conflict.
  • Ten Questions: A Sociological Perspective 78 79 Chapter Four Why Are People Unequal in Society? As parties win in conflict, a system evolves that essentially per ­ be less need for conflict over valued items. Sometimes it is not petuates the resulting inequality: scarcity that is the problem, but simply the fact that some individu­ Creation of a system als or groups are able to accumulate more than what they actually -----. of inequality that Social conflict -----. Triumph of need, creating a source of power over those who do not have a group perpetuates the group's enough. If it were possible to distribute the valued items equally, favored position then conflict would be lessened considerably. However, as Marx re­ Two explanations of social inequality have been presented here: minds us, equal distribution of material goods especially is impossible the division of labor and social conflict. As an organization Qr soci­ when private property exists. Then people are able to to own whatever ety divides tasks among its people, some will become more powerful they can get, and accumulation of what they own becomes difficult than others. As people engage in social conflict, some will win and to limit. They establish as part of their rights keeping whatever they some will lose, and over time a system of unequal power will be cre­ can get. People are no longer governed by satisfying one another's ated. There is no suggestion that those who win are evil and selfish basic needs, but by increasing their privileges and their power in re­ (sometimes they are and sometimes they are not), but most of us lation to others. Jean-Jacques Rousseau describes this most clearly: who succeed will be motivated to preserve the kind of world within The first man who, haVing enclosed a piece of ground, which we were successful and will do things to protect that world. bethought himself of saying, quot;TIllS IS MINEquot; and found peo­ So far we have linked social conflict to social power: Social ple simple enough to believe him, was the real founder of civil power allows some to win in social conflict; winning in social con­ society. From how many crimes, wars and murders, from how flict, in turn, generally brings greater social power. We' have also many horrors and misfortunes might not anyone have saved linked the division of labor to sOdal power: Once a division of labor mankind, by pulling up the stakes, filling up the ditch, and is created, some positions emerge with more power than the others; crying to his fellows, quot;Beware that the fruits of the earth be­ positions with more power are able to ensure the continuation of a long to us all, and the earth itself to nobody.quot; (1755:207) division of labor that favors them. The easiest way to understand the meaning of social power is to If everyone owned everything, if no one had more of a right to ma ­ recognize that it enables actors or organizations to achieve their terial things than anyone else, then inequality would be insignifi­ goals in relation to others. To have a lot of power means that one is cant. In most societies, however, private property exists and is able to triumph over others. Because ofboth sodal conflict and a division cherished. Some people, in conflict over material things, win and of labor, a system of power inequality arises in all groups, organizations, accumulate slaves or land or money. It becomes theirs. The more of and societies. such things some people acquire relative to others, the greater is the inequality between them. Weber calls such things privileges. Privi­ leges include all the benefits the actor receives because of his or her The Rise ofPrivate Property and Unequal Privilege position in society or a social organization-for example, income, The division of labor and social conflict not only create power in ­ housing, office space, health care, and opportunities for education. equality but also distribute privileges in an unequal manner. To un ­ We become unequal, therefore, in both power (our ability to achieve derstand this, let us consider social conflict once more. our will) and privileges (the benefits we receive), and both inequali­ Social conflict means that actors struggle for something: Some ties arise from social conflict. win, some lose. There is struggle over power, but there is also strug­ An inequality of privilege results not only from conflict but also gle over other items that are valued by the actors: land, money, busi­ from the division of labor. Employers make more money than em­ . ness, good housing, good education, safety. There is struggle because ployees; doctors make more than nurses; rock stars make more than these items are scarce; people want more than what is available. teachers. Why should this be? ObViously, those who gain powerful There is conflict, and the more some people get, the less others can positions in the division of labor are in the best position to increase have. If all people could be satisfied with what they had, there would their privilege. Owners of factories have more power than others­
  • 81 Chapter Four Why Are People Unequal in Sodety? Ten Questions: A Sodological Perspective 80 create unequal power, and unequal power allows for increasing and therefore more opportunity-to increase what they receive in privileges. Employers tend to be high on both power and privilege; society. Those who have less powerful positions can increase their employees tend to be low on both. Leaders tend to be high on both; privileges only through organizing and taking a bigger share from followers low. The rich tend to be high on both; the poor tend to be those above them. low. Whites, corporate executives, and army generals tend to be Another reason the division of labor leads to the unequal distri­ high on both; nonwhites, janitors, and privates tend to be low. bution of privilege has something to do with market conditions: Po­ sitions are given different amounts of privilege in an organization Prestige and Inequality because of a combination of (I) importance to that organization (the most important positions tend to get the most privileges), (2) the Another type of inequality emerges in this complex process, and this amount of training and sacrifice one must go through to prepare for inequality influences both power and privilege. This is sodal prestige. those positions (the more the training and sacrifice, the greater the Marx did not emphasize prestige in his analysis, but other soci­ privileges), and (3) the scarcity of people for those positions (the ologists, such as Weber, did. Prestige has to do with how other peo­ fewer the people seeking the position, the greater the privileges). ple evaluate us. All of us wish to be respected by others. Some of us Conversely, any position that is not very important, takes little train­ work our whole lives to gain and keep this respect. Respect is per­ ing, and has many people competing for it will be paid much less. sonal. It centers on the individual qualities that a person possesses: After all, positions that are essential must be filled; to fill them, peo­ integrity, intelligence, talent (musical, athletic, artistic). quot;Man, do I ple must be attracted; to attract them, privileges must be used. Mar­ respect that guy!quot; Prestige is like respect in that it has to do with ket conditions and sodal power combine to ensure that the division how others view us; however, prestige is social. It is honor that oth­ of labor creates a system of unequal privilege. ers accord an individual because of the social position that he or she However, our discussion becomes even more complicated. Not has in sodety. only does social power bring more privilege, but also the reverse is As positions become differentiated in sodety or in any sodal or­ true. Social privileges (for example, money, land, factories) also ganization, people come to attribute different degrees of honor to bring greater social power. Power depends on many things, but those positions. Individuals are judged on the basis of where they are wealth is certainly among the most important. Those in well-paid in the social structure: Are they men or women? white or non­ occupations have more power than those in low-paid occupations. white? professional or blue-collar worker? secretary to the president Those with wealth influence what happens in the economy, in gov­ or secretary to the vice-president? People accord high prestige to the ernment, and in the media. Therefore, it is important to see the top executive and dishonor to the prostitute in society. Officers in relationship between power and privilege: Power begets privilege, the army have more prestige than enlisted personneL professors privilege begets power. Both are the result of sodal conflict and di­ have more prestige than instructors, and the rich more prestige than vision of labor. It may be helpful to illustrate these complex links: the poor. It is not always clear why some positions gain more pres­ Division of labor tige than others, but in large part it is because of the power and privi­ Sodal conflict Private property lege that go with those positions. Powerful and well-paid positions I~ I tend to be the most honored (the upper class, the chairman of the I board, the movie producer, members of Congress). Those without Inequality of power ....-.. Inequality of privilege power or privilege are normally low in prestige (the poor, the un­ employed, the unskilled, minorities). The division of labor differentiates people and creates a system . Not only do power and privilege influence prestige, but also of inequality in both power and privilege. Sodal conflict creates win­ prestige influences power and privilege. Prestige is one basis for ners and losers; the winners are then in a position to increase both power: One can use prestige to achieve one's will. Someone, for ex­ their power and privilege. Social conflict and the right to private ample, who has high prestige in any authority structure or who is property create unequal privileges. Unequal privileges, in turn,
  • ! 82 Ten Questions: A Sodolo9ical Perspective 83 Chapter Four Why Are People Unequal in Soaety? rich, white, male, and so on has an important advantage both in in­ our own organization, social conflict, division of labor, and the right teraction with others and in the general society in achieving his or to private property will ensure that a new system of inequality will her own goals. Prestige can also influence privilege: Those honored arise (even if we do not intentionally create it). in organizations are normally given (or simply demand) special treatment. All three qualities are strongly linked: Prestige begets power and privilege; power begets prestige and privilege; privilege Why Does Inequality Continue? begets prestige and power. Together these benefits help create a Once a system of inequality has been established, it is difficult to ranking system in all organized life. alter. Of course, it changes slightly over time, but it tends to perpetu­ In a sense our picture is complete, and we can begin to see'why ate itself. It seems that five mechanisms work to cause this stability: inequality arises in the first place: A system ofinequality arises in society because of a combination of division of labor, social conflict, and private 1. Efforts of the powerful property. The resulting positions develop different levels of power, privilege, 2. Social institutions and prestige. Power brings privilege and prestige; privilege brings power and 3. Culture prestige; prestige brings power and privilege. 4. Socialization Division of labor 5. Instruments of force Social conflict . Private property I~ Let us examine each in turn. I i Inequality of power ..-... Inequality of privilege Efforts ofthe Powerful ~/ Marx and Michels (the quot;iron law of oligarchyquot;) explain how the Inequality of prestige powerful protect the system of inequality. When one gains a high position, one has the resources to protect oneself. Those who are It is important to understand the basic argument being made not favored within the system have fewer resources to protect here. Simply put, inequality arises from the development ofan unequal themselves and have little ability to change a system that keeps social structure. It is not human nature, supernatural forces, survival them low. In short, inequality is perpetuated through social power, of the fittest, or nature that creates social structure, but the fact that and those who have power are those who benefit from the system of in all social interaction certain important qualities encourage a sys­ inequality. tem of inequality we are calling social structure. Inequality arises Marx highlights this in his theory of society. When some people because it is the nature of our social life to develop social patterns, own the means of production, he argues, they will have great one of the patterns is social structure, and social structure is almost power. They will use this power to protect their positions and in­ always unequal. It is unequal because a permanent system of in­ crease their wealth. Thus, once economic inequality is created, there equality arises from a combination of the division of labor, social will be a strong tendency for the rich to get richer and effectively conflict, and private property. It is unequal because of the interplay protect the whole social structure as well as their positions in that of power, privilege, and prestige that become attached to the vari­ structure. ous positions. We enter organizations-schools, businesses, profes­ Those who own the means of production are appropriately sional associations-each of which has a structure (often called the quot;ruling classquot; by Marx. Control over large businesses gives intentionally created) with positions in place. Although each actor them control over people's jobs, the communities people live in, the has some leeway in these positions, each is also faced with the fact products that are made, the economic decisions that affect the soci­ that positions have over time developed more or less power, privi­ ety, even the world. Control means that any decisions made will lege, and prestige than other positions. And if we interact and form probably help the rich and powerful.
  • 85 Chapter Four Why Are People Unequal in Society? 84 Ten Questions: A Sociological Perspective To some extent Marx and Michels agree: Those who have power Marx goes much further, however. Control over the means of (economic or political) develop interests different from everyone production-economic power-is translated into other types of else's (to maintain the inequality that exists), and they are in the power. Economic power influences government: the rules govern­ very best position to influence society to work in these interests. We' ment goes by, the people who fill its positions, and the laws it makes. must therefore begin to understand the perpetuation of inequality The ruling class influences media, the schools, the courts, and al­ by recognizing that it is in the interests of the most powerful to do most every other sector of society. what they can to maintain the system that favors them, and their .Why does this happen? Simply put, it is in everyone's interests power gives them the ability to do so. to influence successfully the direction of society. I want to--:-;so do you. But I will try to influence it differently from you. For example, you will try to lower tuition, but I will try to raise faculty salaries. Prevailing Social Institutions Feminists, African Americans, lawyers, unions, ministers-to name The result of this control by the ruling class is the creation of institu­ but a few-all have their own agendas, and all V'ould like to see tions, the ongoing and legitimate ways of doing things in society. In· their needs met. The rich and powerful have interests too, but the stitutions, as we saw in Chapter 3, are the established procedures difference between them and everyone else is that they have greater that help to ensure the continuation of society, and to some extent resources to use in ensuring that their needs are, in fact, met. Thus, they benefit most people in society. However, institutions normally although the society never works completely in their interests, the benefit the wealthy and powerful the most, for institutions are cre­ tendency is for it to work in ways that are consistent with what the ated and supported by them, and institutions end up working to powerful want. protect the system of inequality that eXists. Remember: The question we are considering is, how is inequal­ Over time, for example, political institutions are created in soci­ ity perpetuated over time? How is the system able to continue? We ety to make laws, carry out those laws, and interpret those laws. have one answer here: Inequality is perpetuated because those who The United States has separate legislative, executive, and judicial are wealthy and powerful are in the best position to ensure that their branches of government to do this. Other societies, including Eng­ interests-the protection of their wealth and power-are met land (which is at least as democratic as the United States) do not throughout· society. separate these powers. The political system in the United States is Michels agrees with Marx in that he, too, argues that those who characterized by a two-party system, an electoral college, federal­ have power will protect the system of inequality. Michels empha­ ism, separation of powers, and civilian control over the military. sizes the political side of the coin rather than the economic. He is These are our political institutions, our ways of dealing with politi­ not interested in ownership of the means of production, but in peo­ cal matters. We also have economic institutions such as multina­ ple who lead society. He simply makes the point that leaders in any tional corporations, a Federal Reserve system, a stock market, organization will over time become increasingly separated from private property, and private enterprise. We also have certain edu­ everyone else in the organization. They will have a stake in keeping cational, religious, health care, military, kinship, and entertainment their positions and in continuing their policies. They will try to en­ institutions. The United States as a society works-or does not sure that their positions remain theirs, and that the system of in­ work-because of its institutions. One primary reason the Soviet equality is maintained in their favor. Although they might be elected Union was forced to turn from a communist system was simply be­ democratically, once they are in their positions, there is a strong cause its institutions could not solve the problems it faced in the tendency for them to regard their positions as quot;theirs,quot; and they will .1990s. It did not work. tend to institute policies and pursue goals that are consistent with It is important to realize that institutions generally work for the that belief. Leaders eventually unite and form a self-supporting elite society as it is. If they seem to work, they continue; if they seem to that distinguishes them from everyone else. Others in organization work in the interests of the powerful, they are especially encour­ tend to trust them, and they, in turn, become more and more inter­ aged. Once a society develops a system of inequality, the prevailing institu­ ested in perpetuating the system that favors their positions.
  • 87 86 Chapter Four Why Are People Unequal in Sodety? Ten Questions: A Sodological Perspective ization means that we take on many of the qualities that people who tions tend to work in such a way that the inequality is maintained or even· represent society (parents, political leaders, religious leaders, media increased. It is easier to see this process in other societies than in our leaders, and teachers) teach us. To a great extent, we take on their own. Saudi Arabia is a society where almost everything that exists language, their rules, their values, and their expectations-and our works to maintain the wealth and power of a few families and the socialization into culture is how we come to accept the system of in­ dominance of men over women. That is the way the government. equality we inherit from our ancestors. the economy, the religion, the military, and the family work in that Culture almost always includes justifications for inequality. For society. Apartheid in South Africa, the forced separation of the races example, Americans generally believe that we live within an eco­ for purposes of domination by the whites, was maintained through nomic order in which people will be justly rewarded for hard work: a complex set of institutions. In China, government, military, edu­ MIf you work hard, you can rise to the top. quot; In a sense, we believe cation, and media combine to help ensure the continued dictator­ ship of a small party. that the system of inequality is somehow just and democratic, re­ warding those who ought to be rewarded. This is the type of cul­ Unless equality is a value that a society truly pursues, the insti­ tural idea an individual comes to believe through socialization. Peter tutions will normally protect and expand inequality. Poverty con­ Berger argues that most societies actually develop two ideologies tinues in the United States because institutions are not truly set up that serve to protect inequality. One ideology legitimates the posi­ to deal with this problem. Our tax system does not substantially re­ tion of the upper classes, usually arguing that these people are some­ distribute wealth, it does little to effectively limit the wealth that how superior or more deserving. (For example, they are more one can achieve, and in the past decade it has actually contributed talented, more hardworking, or superior in culture.) The other ide­ to greater inequality. Our schools, government, welfare system, and economic system may be wonderful in some ways, but they tend to ology argues that poverty is a consequence of sin or laziness and protect the system of inequality that prevails and maintain people in that good behavior by the poor will eventually be rewarded in the afterlife or next life. the class positions of their birth. Institutions maintain our segre­ In European societies, inequality was justified for centuries gated society, they generally support the inequality between men through arguing that it was God's plan. God chose the rulers and and women, and they protect the power and privileges of a political and economic elite. This is why sociologists tend to see the perpetu­ also favored an upper class whose purpose was to lead the masses. ation of inequality built into society itself. It is rare to see a society Although revolution eventually destroyed this idea, it held on for a whose real purpose is to maintain a system of equality. long time. Indeed, in much of the world today inequality is still seen Remember Voltaire's warning described at the beginning of this to be God's will, and in most cases people are taught to spend their time and energy doing other things besides trying to change society chapter. Unless a society really makes efforts to create and maintain to make it more equal. equality, the tendency will be toward a state of inequality. It is easy to see why this is true when we recognize the tendency for social For a long time, people in the United States denied the existence institutions to protect and expand social inequality. of either a rich upper class or a class of poor people: quot;We are the Thus, the second reason why inequality becomes perpetuated land of equal opportunity for all.quot; To believe this is to deny the ef­ in society is that institutions generally work in that direction, partly fects of inequality, and such an idea works well to protect the in­ because the powerful have the greatest impact on the nature of equality that actually exists. It is difficult to identify exactly what those institutions. American culture consists of, but try to list the very basic ideas, val­ ues, and morals that we believe in, and you will see that they work to uphold the system of inequality that prevails: MThe poor do not Culture: The Acceptance ofInequality really want to work [and thus deserve their fate].quot; MCapitalism with Over time, most people come to accept the inequality that eXists. little government regulation and taxes is the most just and efficient Obviously, this acceptance aids its perpetuation. economic system.quot; MPeople have a right to make what they can, keep It is important to remember that people are socialized into the all that they make, and pass down to their children all that they society within which they are born. As we saw in Chapter 2, social­ keep.quot; MWe may be a class society, but everyone has the chance to
  • 88 Ten Questions: A Sociological Perspective Chapter Four Why Are People Unequal in Society? 89 strike it rich.quot; quot;People are naturally competitive, selfish, and lazy. quot;lack of motivation.quot; Many Americans have recently come to be­ We all work to beat the other guy, we all take whatever we can get, lieve that we have moved too fast toward equal rights and that soci­ and we have to be paid well if we're going to work.quot; ety has done enough. Or consider the ideas that accompany other kinds of inequality: Culture is also important in what it does not teach. The 1990s quot;Women are not naturally capable of competing in the political and have seen the collapse of the Soviet domination of Eastern Europe economic world.quot; quot;God did not mean for women to work outside and the rapid decline in communist institutions within the Soviet the home.quot; quot;Women have a moral obligation to obey their hus­ Union. The U.S. media have responded by paying tribute to certain bands.quot; quot;Blacks are naturally inferior to whites.quot; quot;God meant for American institutions and values, especially private property, a free blacks to obey whites.quot; All of these ideas-and many more-have market, and freedom to own one's own business. Somewhere along existed in our own society and have worked to retain systems of in­ the line these values have come to dominate our culture more than equality. Similar ideas exist in other societies. In India people are equal opportunity, social justice, respect for the individuaL and cul­ born into castes in which they are expected to stay their entire lives. tural pluralism. It is not that we no longer believe in the latter; it is How can such a system be justified? The answer is thatpeople come simply that the former values have come to dominate our thinking. to believe that their position in the next life depends on how well By ignoring equality and social justice, culture tends to support in­ they accept their position in this life. Caste is seen as a test; accep­ equality and lack of social justice. It does not encourage people to tance of position becomes a moral virtue. And when people become question the extent to which these inequalities exist in society. too sophisticated to believe such ideas, new ideas arise to justify in­ Even in organizations we see ideas that 'serve to justify inequal­ equality: quot;Women are naturally different from men and will do bet­ ity there: quot;The leader knows what is going on; the rest of us just ter than men in some things, such as rearing children, and not in don't have enough information to make intelligent decisions.quot; others, such as mathematics.quot; quot;I believe that blacks should be equal quot;Democracy, where everyone votes, is inefficient.quot; quot;The real world to whites, but the fact that they are not is their own fault.quot; quot;It is isn't equal. Why should this organization practice equality? We have morally right for us to dominate nonwhites in society because of to run this place like a business, don't we?quot; quot;You want justice? Life their cultural inferiority-they just do not accept the right values is simply not just.quot; and ideas, and thus deserve their positions.quot; The key point should not be missed: Society-all social organi­ In Oppression, Turner, Singleton, and Musick carefully show how zation-develops a system of belief (quot;culturequot;), and that system of the dominant beliefs in the United States concerning African Ameri­ belief (among other things) functions to protect the inequality that cans have changed as the relationship between blacks and whites prevails. has changed (1984:170-176). We always work out a new ideology But where does the culture come from? As we saw in Chapter that justifies inequality. Before 1820, whites described blacks as un­ 3, a culture is a set of ideas, values, and rules that people adopt over civilized heathens, the curse of God, and ill-suited for freedom. After time as they deal with their environment. These ideas, values, and 1820 and before the Civil War, slavery was justified as good for both rules are partly true, but more important, they are useful. Our cul­ blacks and whites, an institution that civilized and protected African ture works for us; other people's culture works for them. Culture Americans. After the Civil War and before World War I, while all explains and guides our actions. But who is us? Whom does culture areas of life became segregated, blacks were described as inherently really benefit? In one sense, it benefits everyone because it helps inferior, and thus segregation became necessary for the protection bring peace and order to our relationships. It helps guide our choices of whites. From World War I to 1941, as African Americans moved and how we live our lives. However-and this is the point being north, black inferiority became a quot;scientific fact,quot; and segregation made here-eulture most especially benefits those people who gain was described as naturaL distinctive, and desired by both races. After the most from society: those at the very top of society. World War II, as discrimination and segregation were increasingly It should come as no surprise that those at the top try to ensure attacked, ideas favoring inequality were fewer. After 1968, how­ that their ideas, values, and rules prevail in society. Think of the so­ ever, inequality again became justified: There is black inferiority, ciety giving rise to many ideas. Which ones are believed, and which and it is due to the African Americans themselves, especially their ones are rejected? This question is not answered simply, but be
  • 91 Chapter Four Why Are People Unequal in Society? Ten Questions: A Sociological Perspective 90 sition, some figure out ways to make great leaps to overcome their aware that ideas, values, and rules must have sponsors, groups that subordinate position, and some succeed. Most who try do not suc­ push for their acceptance. Those groups with the most power will ceed, not because of lack of effort or intelligence alone, but because have the best chance for their ideas to be accepted. To some extent real opportunity is denied by factors related to class and minority Marx is correct: The rich not only produce the goods of society, but positions. And for those who try and do not succeed, it becomes in­ also to a great extent produce (and spread) the society's culture. creasingly difficult to hold onto aspirations that seem to be out of And, of course, when ideas, values, and rules are put forth that are reach. Here is one of the most important ways we are all socialized: not consistent with those of the elite, they will be opposed and have We are taught to change our sights, and this means accepting the less chance for acceptance. position that most people like us are expected to stay in. Inequality prevails in society, then, because it is supported by Legitimate authority is one of the concepts that Weber intro­ culture; and culture, in turn, most reflects the ideas, values, and duces to sociology. Why is it that we willingly obey others over us? norms of the most powerful in society. he asked. His answer is that most of us believe that they have a right to command us. Socialization induces people to feel a part of a com­ Socialization: The Acceptance ofPlace munity and to feel an obligation to obey the people who represent that community. We come to believe that we must accept the pre­ Besides the fact that people are socialized to accept the system of in­ vailing system of inequality as right if we are to exist as a commu­ equality itself, they are also s9cialized to accept their own position. nity. A stable system of inequality is built into the community's This is a complex process. We learn who we are early in life. Our tradition or law that loyal people feel an obligation to follow. Our neighbors, parents, and teachers tell us in overt and covert ways our system of inequality appears to most citizens to be legitimate, and ranks in society and what we have a right to expect from life: quot;Peo­ most feel a moral obligation to obey those above them. ple like us don't do those things.quot; quot;Marry your own kind.quot; quot;Go to Thus, the system prevails through the collusion of the individu­ Harvard.quot; quot;Be satisfied with the college in your own town.quot; We are als who are socialized into society. Socialization brings the accep­ taught what to expect from life if we work hard (generally slightly tance of a culture that justifies inequality, and it normally brings an above our present rank, whatever that may be), but rarely do we acceptance of one's relative position in that system of inequality. expect great things without a realistic model to go by. Wealthy busi­ ness executives socialize their children to expect wealth, fame, and power. Lawyers socialize their children to expect a professional po­ Society's Instruments ofForce sition. Of course, we are not simply the result of what our parents Of course, some individuals refuse to accept their place in society expect, but they, together with teachers (who teach in class-based and try to improve their position in any way they can, including schools) and friends (who tend to come from our class-based neigh­ going outside the law. Often, they realize that the system works borhoods), show us where we are in society and teach us to expect against them and that to make it they cannot try the normal chan­ approximately that level. nels. Through their acts they threaten the legitimacy of the prevail· In Schooling in Capitalist America, Bowles and Gintis highlight ing order. Procedures are instituted to discover, control, and punish how legitimating inequality and teaching people their positions is such individuals. Police, courts, and prisons work to protect more an integral part of our educational system. Schools sort students into than people; they also protect the system of inequality. academic tracks, which distribute students into the occupational sys­ Some groups refuse to accept the system itself and organize to tem and ultimately into the economic system. Schools teach disci­ overthrow it. In our society such groups have some leeway: They pline, hierarchy, and obedience, and they teach students to expect usually have the right to say what they want and to write what they little control over their work. Working-class students learn obedi­ want. When they act outside the law to alter the system, we call ence; upper-middle-class students learn leadership and innovation. them revolutionaries, and we use force to stop them. All societies Or witness, too, women and minorities who are socialized to draw lines, and all try to control groups with force if they threaten accept subordinate positions in most societies. Such socialization is the established order, including the prevailing system of inequality. usually successfuL but not always. IneVitably, some refuse their po-
  • 93 Chapter Four Why Are People Unequal in Society? Ten Questions: A Sociological Perspective 92 equality would prevail in society, the twentieth century has not Although crime and revolution upset order and create hardship proved him right. Indeed, the situation seems far more complicated. for all people in society, those at the top of the system of inequality In the Soviet Union; China, or Cuba, nations where private prop­ have the most to lose. It is their favored status that is most at risk. erty was abolished, there still arose a stable system of inequality, They have the most property to lose. The advantages they enjoy are perhaps not based on ownership of property as much as on political threatened. It is vital to them that what they worked for or inher­ leadership, occupation, and control over (rather than ownership of) ited be protected. They therefore take an active interest in politics, property. Even in the Israeli kibbutz, where people have equal con­ law, and law enforcement. Marx goes so far as to say that the state's trol over the collective resources and where decisions are democrat­ purpose is to protect the ruling class. At the very least, we can s.~e ically made, an informal system of inequality develops between that legitimate instruments of force are important ways in which leaders and everyone else. those at the top are able to protect themselves and maintain the sys­ To claim that inequality is inevitable does not mean that people tem of inequality. should also claim that poverty and hardship must be accepted or Every organization establishes instruments of social. control that that tyranny must be tolerated. The question for all human beings protect the structure. Colleges use grades, threats of suspension, and, should be, How much inequality is to be tolerated in society or in an sometimes, refusals to cooperate with threatening students. A busi­ organization? How much inequality is necessary? beneficial? democ­ ness can fire, demote, or refuse to promote. A family can send the ratic? humane? moral? offender to his or her room or quot;groundquot; the individual for two To realize that inequality is inevitable also means that those peo­ weeks. An informal group can simply let the member know that he ple dedicated to principles of equality have a difficult task ahead, be­ or she is not liked and may not invite the individual to future activi­ cause so much in society seems to encourage and protect a system ties. Of course, there is some individuality and some freedom, but of inequality. In this respect, equality is like freedom: Far from being threats to the prevailing system of inequality are always reacted to. automatic, it is possible only with eternal vigilance. Summary and Conclusion REFERENCES Inequality arises from social conflict, the division of labor, and the The following works examine various forms of social inequality, fo­ existence of private property. It also arises from the mutual influ­ cusing especially on class, race, and gender. All are good introduc­ ence of power, privilege, and prestige. Through it all, a relatively tions to the general questions of why inequality arises and how it is permanent structure is created, and people are placed in it and so­ perpetuated. Some look at inequality in all societies; some concen­ cialized into it. trate on the United States. Inequality continues over time. The efforts of those at the top of society-in the economy, in government, in education, in the crimi­ Adam, BarryB. 1978 The Survival ofDomination: Inferiorization and nal justice system, and in media-help perpetuate it. The institu­ Everyday Life. New York: Elsevier. tions of society, the basic ways in which things are done. operate to Anderson, Elijah 1990 Streetwise: Race. Class. and Change in an Urban uphold the existing inequality. The socialization of people into a cul­ Community. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ture that justifies inequality is also an important factor, as well as Baldwin, James 1963 The Fire Next Time. New York: Dial Press. the successful socialization of people to learn and accept their posi­ Ballantine, Jeanne H. 1993 The Sodology ofEducation. 3rd ed. tion. Finally, instruments of force are used to perpetuate inequality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Some inequality is probably inevitable. People must work very Baltzell, E. Digby 1964 The Protestant Establishment: Aristocracy and hard to prevent its emergence, and once it emerges, they must work Caste in America. New York: Vintage. even harder if they wish to control it. Robert Michels argues that or­ BeeghIey, Leonard 1983 Living Poorly in America. New York: Praeger. ganizations with leaders will inevitably develop a system of inequal­ BeeghIey, Leonard 1989 The Structure of Sodal Stratification in the ity and that ultimately that system will be very difficult to eradicate. United States. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Although Marx believed that with the destruction of capitalism
  • I,: 95 ' .' Chapter Four Why Are People Unequal in Society? 94 Ten Questions: A Sociological Perspective Engels, Friedrich 1884 aThe Origin of the Family, Private Property, Beeghley, Leonard 1996 What Does Your Wife Do? Gender and the and the State.· In Karl Marx: On Society and Social Change. 1972 ed. Ed. Transformation ofFamily LIfe. Boulder, co: Westview Press. Neil J. Smelser. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Berger, Bennett M. 1995 An Essay on Culture: Symbolic Structure and Ewen, Stuart 1976 Captains ofConsciousness. New York: McGraw-Hill. Social Structure. Berkeley: University of California Press. Ezekiel, Raphael S. 1995 The Racist Mind. New York: Viking. Bernard, Jessie 1987 The Female World from a Global Perspective. Farley, John E. ,1988 Majority-Minority Relations. 2nd ed. Englewood Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Blau, Peter M., and Marshall W. Meyer 1987 Bureaucracy in Modern Feagin, Joe R., and Clairece Booher Feagin 1986 Discrimination SoCiety. 3rd ed. New York: Random House. American Style: Institutional Racism and Sexism. 2nd ed. Malabar, FL: Blauner, Robert 1972 Racial Oppression in America. New York: Harper' Kreiger. and Row. Feagin, Joe R., and Melvin P. Sikes 1994 Living with Racism: The Bottomore, T. B. 1966 Classes in Modern Society. New York: Pantheon Black Middle Class Experience. Boston: Beacon Press. Books. Feiner, Susan F. (ed.) 1994 Race and Gender in the American Economy: Bowles, Samuel, and Herbert Gintis 1976 Schooling and'Capitalist Views from Across the Spectrum. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. America. New York: Basic Books. Freeman, Jo 1995 Women: A Feminist Perspective. 5th ed. Palo Alto, Carmichael, Stokely, and Charles V. Hamilton 1967 Black Power. CA: Mayfield. New York: Random House. Friedan, Betty 1963 The Feminine Mystique. New York: Norton. Cashmore, E. Ellis 1987 The Logic ofRacism. London: Allen and Galbraith, John Kenneth 1979 The New Industrial State. 3rd ed. New Unwin. York: New American Library. Chafetz, Janet Saltzman 1990 Gender Equity: An Integrated Theory of Gans, Herbert J. 1995 The War Against the Poor: The Underclass and Stability and Change. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Antipoverty Policy. New York: Basic Books. Chambliss, William J. 1973 aThe Saints and the Roughnecks.· Gilbert, Dennis, and Joseph A. Kahl 1993 The American Class Society, 11: 24-31. Structure. 4th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Chambliss, William J., and Robert Seidman 1982 Law, Order, and Gordon, Milton M. 1978 Human Nature, Class, and Ethnicity. New Power. 2nd ed. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. York: Oxford University Press. Collins, Randall 1979 The Credential Society: An Historical Sociology of Guillaumin, Colette 1995 Racism, Sexism, Power and Ideology. New Education and Stratification. New York: Academic Press. York: Routledge. Cookson, P. W., and C. H. Persell 1985 Preparing for PoWer: Healey, Joseph F. 1997 Race, Ethnicity, and Gender in the United States: America's Elite Boarding Schools. New York: Basic Books. Inequality, Group Conflict, and Power. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge. Crompton, Rosemary 1993 Class and Stratification: An Introduction to Hill, Herbert, and James E. Jones, Jr. (eds.) 1993 Race in America: Current Debates. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press. The Struggle for Equality. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Dahrendorf, Ralf 1959 Class and Class Conflict in Industrial Society. Hothschild, Jennifer L. 1995 Facing Up to the American Dream: Race, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Class. and the Soul of the Nation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Dalphin, John 1987 The Persistence ofSocial Inequality in America. 2nd Press. ed. Cambridge, MA: Schenkman. Huber, Joan, and Glenna Spitze 1983 Sex Stratification: Children, Della Fave, L. Richard 1980 aThe Meek Shall Not Inherit the Earth: Housework. and Jobs. New York: Academic Press. Self-Evaluation and the Legitimacy of Stratification.· Amen'can Jencks, Christopher, et al. 1979 Who Gets Ahead? The Determinants of Sociological Review, 45: 955-971. Economic Success in America. New York: Basic Books. Durkheim, Emile 1893 The Division ofLabor in Society. 1964 ed. Trans. Kanter, Rosabeth 1977 Men and Women of the Corporation. New York: George Simpson. New York: Free Press. Basic Books. Dye, Thomas R. 1990 Who's Running America? 5th ed. Englewood Keller, Suzanne 1963 Beyond the Ruling Class: Strategic Elites in Modern Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Society. New York: Random House. Eliade, Mircea 1954 Cosmos and History. New York: Harper and Row.
  • ~4 Ten Questions: A Sociological Perspective 97 Chapter Four Why Are People Unequal in Society? Phillips, Kevin 1990 The Politics ofRich and Poor. New York: Random House. Piven, Frances Fox, and Richard A. Cloward 1993 Regulating ofthe Poor: The Functions ofPublic Welfare. 2nd ed. New York: Vintage Books. Rousseau, Jean-Jacques 1755 quot;A Discourse on the Origin of . Inequality.· In The Social Contract and Discourses. 1913 ed. Trans. G.D.H. Cole. New York: E. P. Dutton. Ryan, William 1976 Blaming the Victim. Rev. ed. New York: Vintage. Ryan, William 1982 Equality. New York: Vintage. Simpson, George E., and J. Milton Yinger 1985 Racial and Cultural Minorities: An Analysis ofPrejudice and Discrimination. 5th ed. New York: Harper and Row. Steinberg, Stephen 1989 The Ethnic Myth: Race, Ethnicity, and Class in America. 2nd ed. Boston: Beacon Press. Steinberg, Stephen 1995 Turning Back: The Retreat from Racial Justice in American Thought and Policy. Boston: Beacon Press. Tams, Carol, and Carole Wade 1984 The Longest War: Sex Differences in Perspective. 2nd ed. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Thrasher, Frederic 1927 The Gang. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Turnin, Melvin M. 1985 Social Stratification: The Forms and Functions of Inequality. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Turner, Jonathan H., Royce Singleton, and David Musick 1984 Oppression: A Socio-History ofBlack-White Relations in America. Chicago: Nelson-Hall. U.S. Bureau of the Census 1990 Money Income and Poverty Status in the United States, 1989. Current Population Reports. Series P-60, no. 168. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. U.S. Congress, Joint Economic Committee 1986 The Concentration of Wealth in the U.S. Washington, DC: U.S. Congress, Joint Economic Committee. Useem, Michael 1984 The Inner Circle. New York: Oxford University Press. Van den Berghe, Pierre 1978 Race and Racism: A Comparative Perspective. New York: John Wiley. Wallerstein, Immanuel 1974 The Modern World-System. New York: Academic Press. Weitzman, Lenore J. 1985 The Divorce Revolution: The Unexpected Consequences for Women and Children in America. New York: The Free Press. Whyte, William F. 1949 quot;The Social Structure of the Restaurant.· American Sociological Review, 54: 302-310.