This document discusses social stratification and inequality. It defines social stratification as a system that ranks people based on power, wealth and prestige. There are two main types of stratification systems - closed systems like caste systems that allow little mobility, and open class systems that permit more mobility. Theories on stratification include functionalist, social conflict, and symbolic interactionist perspectives. Gender, ethnicity and other factors also influence social ranking. Inequality is reproduced through mechanisms like cultural and social capital that advantage some groups over others. Stratification occurs globally with some nations being much wealthier than others.

1. Social and Political Stratification
Key Concepts
Social stratification is a system by which a society ranks categories of people in a
hierarchy according to power, wealth, and prestige (Macionis 2012: 224). Power, wealth,
and prestige are referred to as social desirables, or rewards of social positions of
statuses. Wealth pertains to ownership or control of resource. Power is the ability to
compel obedience or control a number of people. Prestige refers to social recognition
and deference. People in different positions have different access to wealth, power, and
prestige. These differences in society give rise to social inequality.
Macionis (2012) points out that in certain societies, some people experience social
mobility or the change in position within the social hierarchy. Vertical mobility refers to
the change from one status to another that is higher or lower. Individuals who rose from
modest beginnings to fame and fortune experience upward mobility. Some people move
downward because of business failures, unemployment, or illness. In contrast, horizontal
mobility is the change from one status to another that is roughly equivalent. This is the
case when people switch from one job to another at about the same social level.
There are two types of social stratification systems. Closed systems allow for little
change in social position, while open systems, permit much more social mobility. Closed
systems are called caste systems, and more open systems are called class systems. A
caste system is social stratification based on ascription, or birth. India’s caste system
and apartheid, or separation of the races in South Africa, are examples of a caste system.
A class system, in contrast, is social stratification based on both birth and individual
achievement. The system is common in industrial societies. In some societies such as
the United Kingdom and Japan, social stratification mixes caste and class (Macionis
2012: 228).
Theories of Social Stratification
A. Functionalist Perspective
According to the structural-functional approach, social inequality exists because it
plays a vital part in the continued existence of society. Kingsley Davis and Wilbert
Moore (1945) argue that the more important a position is to society, the more
rewards a society attaches to it. Rewarding important work with income, prestige,
and power encourages people to do these jobs and to work better, longer, and
harder. Macionis (2012: 231—233) summarizes the criticisms of Davis-Moore
Theory as follows:
 How do we assess the importance of a particular occupation? Do rewards actually
reflect the contribution someone makes to society? Do corporate executives, for
example, deserve mega-salaries for their contributions to society?
 Living in a society that places so much emphasis on money, we tend to
overestimate the importance of high-paying work. How does one see the value of
work that is not oriented toward making money?

2.  It likewise ignores how social inequality may promote conflict and even outright
revolution. This criticism leads us to the social-conflict approach...
B. Social Conflict Perspective
Marxist Social-Conflict Perspective
Social conflict analysis draws on the ideas of Karl Marx and Max Weber (Macionis
2012: 232–234). Rather than viewing social stratification as benefiting society as
a whole, it emphasizes how it benefits some people and disadvantages others.
According to Marx, social stratification is created and maintained by one group in
order to protect and enhance its own economic interests. Since stratification is not
essential in a classless society. As expected, the Marxist view is criticized for
denying the Davis-Moore theory: that a system of unequal rewards is necessary
to place talented people in the right jobs and to motivate them to work hard.
Weberian Social Conflict Perspective
Max Weber claimed that social stratification involves three distinct dimensions
of inequality: class, social status or prestige, and power (Macionis 2012: 234–
235). A public school teacher might exercise great power as a source of knowledge
and wisdom in the community yet have little wealth or social prestige. Influenced
by Weber’s ideas, sociologists use the term socioeconomic status (SES) to refer
to a composite ranking based on various dimensions of social inequality, and not
only on economic position or class as Marx argued.
C. Symbolic Interactionist Perspective
The symbolic-interaction approach, a micro-level analysis and influenced by the
ideas of Weber, explains that we size up people by looking for clues to their social
standing. We can know about a person’s position in society through status
symbol, anything than can give an idea as to what stratum an individual belongs
to. Among some groups, conspicuous consumption, or buying and displaying
products that make a “statement” about social class, happens. For Thorstein
Veblen (1953, orig. 1899, cited in Macionis 2012: 235–236; 546) who introduced
the concept, conspicuous consumption involves people buying expensive products
not because they need them but to show off their wealth.
Inequality
One important dimension of social stratification is income inequality. Poverty is a state in
which resources, usually material but sometimes cultural, are lacking. Relative poverty
is the lack of resources of some people in relation to those who have more. Absolute
poverty refers to a lack of resources that is life threatening (Macionis 2012: 257).
Social ranking likewise involves gender and ethnicity. Minority refers to any category of
people distinguished by physical or cultural difference that a society sets apart and
subordinates (Macionis 2012: 303). In societies that give more power and other resources
to men than to women, gender is an important dimension of social stratification (Macionis

3. 2012: 299). Gender is the meaning a culture attaches to being female or male (see
Chapter 3). Gender stratification is the unequal distribution of wealth, power, and
privilege between men and women. Often, as a result, women increasingly join the ranks
of the poor, giving rise to a phenomenon referred to as the feminization of poverty.
Ethnicity is a shared cultural heritage based on common ancestry, language, or religion
that gives a group people a distinctive social identity (Macionis 2012: 320). People of a
particular ethnicity can be a target of prejudice, just like those of a particular social class,
sex, sexual orientation, age, political affiliation, or physical disability. Prejudice is a rigid
and unfair generalization about a category of people. A related concept, discrimination,
is the unequal treatment of various categories of people. Macionis (2012: 323–324)
clarifies that prejudice refers to attitudes while discrimination involves actions. Both
prejudice and discrimination can be either positive (favorable views, providing special
advantages) or negative (unfavorable views, creating obstacles). Also, these biases may
be built into the operation of society’s institutions such as schools, hospitals, the police,
and the workplace. This is referred to as institutional prejudice and discrimination.
Social Reproduction of Inequality
Sociologist Pierre Bourdieu (1990) points out that various linguistic and cultural
competencies that some parents pass on to their children are capital. He highlights the
importance of family background to one’s social status. Cultural capital refers to cultural
advantages coming from a “good home.”
Social capital refers to “features of social organization, such as networks, norms, and
trust, that facilitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit” (Putnam 1993:35).
Putnam argues the social capital embodied in norms and networks of civic engagement
seems to be a precondition for economic development, as well as for effective
government. Many studies have, however, documented how dynamics of social capital
may result in social exclusion as nonmembers of an organization or networks may not
have access to the resources otherwise available to members.
Symbolic capital refers to the resources available to an individual on the basis of honor,
prestige, or recognition. Graduating from a certain university, for example, may have
symbolic capital in the context of looking for a job. Bourdieu (1984) points out that
symbolic capital can come from the possession and appropriation of objects with a
perceived or concrete sense of value. For example, a watch worn by a Hollywood actress
possesses symbolic capital because of the prestige of the one wearing it, which in turn
distinguishes the person wearing it.
Political capital refers to the goodwill that a politician or political policy can build up with
the public through the pursuit of popular policies. This goodwill can be then be mobilized
to achieve other objectives such as the passing of unpopular policies.
Global Stratification and Inequality

4. Social stratification involves not just people within a single country; it is also a worldwide
pattern with some nations far more economically productive than others.
One system of classifying countries is according to a Three Worlds Model:
The “First World” is made up of rich, industrial, capitalist countries, while the “Second
World” refers to less industrialized socialist countries. The non- industrialized poor
countries comprise the “Third World.” Macionis (2012) notes that in this model, the
capitalist West (the First World) and the socialist East (the Second World) are against
each other, while other nations (the Third World) remain more or less on the sidelines.
Changes inEastern Europe and the collapse of the former Soviet Union in the early 1990s
meant the end of the “Second World,” and the usefulness of the three worlds model.
The revised system of classification is not based on ideology or political structure but
on the economic development of countries (United Nations Development Programme
2010 and the World Bank 2011, as cited in Macionis 2012: 271).
High-income countries: The 72 high-income countries are those with the highest overall
standards of living. These nations have a per capita gross domestic product (GDP)
greater than $12,000.
Middle-income countries: The 70 middle-income countries are those with a standard of
living about average for the world as a whole. Their per capita GDP is less than $12,000
but greater than $2,500.
Low-income countries: The remaining 53 low-income countries are those with a per
capita GDP less than $2,500, and a low standard of living. Most people in these nations
are poor.
Theories of Global Stratification
There are two major explanations for inequality among nations: Modernization theory and
Dependency theory (Macionis 2012: 280-281).
1. Modernization Theory. Walt Rostow explains global inequality in terms of
technological and cultural differences between nations. Nations become rich by
developing advanced technology, a process that depends on a culture that
encourages innovation and change toward higher living standards. Rostow
identifies four stages of development:
Traditional stage: People’s lives are built around families and local
communities (Example: Bangladesh)
 Take-off stage: A market emerges as people produce goods not just for
their own use but also to trade with others for profit. (Example: Thailand)
 Drive to technological maturity: The ideas of economic growth and higher
living standards gain widespread support (Example: Mexico)

5.  High mass consumption: Advanced technology fuels mass production and
mass consumption as people now “need” countless goods. (Example: the
United States of America)
How to address global inequalities? Rostow’s modernization theory highlights
the role of technology transfer and foreign aid. Accordingly, rich nations can help
poor nations by providing technology to control population size, increase food
production, and expand industrial output and by providing foreign aid to support
economic development.
2. Dependency theory. This views global inequality as a result of the historical
exploitation of poor nations by rich ones. It maintains that colonialism created
global inequality beginning 500 years ago, giving rise to rich nations and
underdeveloped poor nations. This process continues today in the form of
neocolonialism, or the economic exploitation of poor nations by multinational
corporations. Immanuel Wallerstein’s model of the capitalist world economy
identified three categories of nations:
 Core: the world’s high-income countries, which are home to multinational
corporations
 Semiperiphery: the world’s middle-income countries, with ties to core
nations
 Periphery: the world’s low-income countries, which provide cheap labor and
raw materials, and a vast market for industrial products
How to address global inequalities? The dependency theory claims that three
factors, namely export-orientation, a lack of industrial capacity, and foreign debt,
make poor countries dependent on rich nations and prevent their economic
development.
Andre Gunder Frank’s dependencytheory argues that countries in the Periphery must
cut the “umbilical cord” that connects them to the Center, if they were to become
developed countries themselves.