Is social class still a useful concept for understanding the divisions in society - Essay Example

? Topic:  Is social still a useful concept for understanding the divisions in society? s Introduction: Social class is the most widely used term in sociology which refers to the primary structure of social stratification broadly used for defining the modern capitalist societies. According to Haralambos and Holborn (2004), social stratification is the term which coins the presence of certain social groups which are distinguished from other social groups on the basis of wealth and prestige. These “certain” social groups are ranked on the basis of certain factors. Social stratification has given rise to inequality in the society. It clearly defines the privileges that are enjoyed by the most advantageous individuals (Fulcher and Scott, 1999). However, Haralambos and Holborn suggest that social inequality is the most prominent feature of all the human societies. From the beginning of the formation of the human societies, this system of social stratification has prevailed as the most important component of the human societies. According to Bilton et al, (1994), traditional Indian caste system, feudalism and other societal systems based on caste and status are the most highlighted and the distinct societal structures. In human societies, individuals are classified on the basis of their economic power, distribution of wealth and other materialized advantages they enjoy. These factors have given rise to the development and division of social classes. According to sociologist Karl Marx, to understand the structure of social strata it is highly important to know what constitute social inequality in a system. For Karl Marx, class stratification was of important value and he thoroughly argued that all societies were established on the basis of class system except for the most primitive ones (Fulcher and Scott, 1999). Karl Marx further adds that all class struggle has always existed in the history of all the societies. According to Marx and Engles (1848), class struggle is the important component and almost all the societies go through this phase of struggle. Marx has always classified the structure of the society on the basis of class system. According to him the society is divided into two basis classes; the capitalist class. This class possesses the capacity of production and the working class which possess labor power. The labor class sells their services to the production class in return of wages. Marx has highlighted the exploitation caused by the capitalist class to the working class in terms of the wages paid to them which is just a fraction of their services they put in making and raising the value of the products they sell in markets. Marx believed that the capitalist class earns their profits and other benefits at the cost of laboring class. Labor class is deprived of their fundamental rights and benefits by the capital class as they hold power, wealth and prestige over them. He further believes that this trend would eventually lead the capitalist class to turn into a communist society which in other words, it will be the downfall of the capitalist class. According to Marx, economic structure is the important element in structuring the social classes. However, Haralambos and Holborn (2004), different groups in the society are emerged from the rise of different classes and hence, this has given rise to inequality in the society. Marx Weber also agrees with the opinion of Karl Marx that competition in market to gain economic resources and other benefits among individuals that has further given rise to different social classes. According to him, other factors also play an important role in the better understanding of composition and division of class system in the society. According to Weber, the class system is divided into four types in a capitalist society (Haralambos and Holborn, 2004). Bocock and Thompson (1995) highlights the Weber?s idea in which he agrees with the opinion of Karl Marx that the division of major classes is between the capitalist class and the working class but however, he further argued that the division of the classes between the two groups should be on the basis of propertied and propertyless classes. On the other hand, Haralambos and Holborn (2004) states the idea of Weber that he believed that other factors apart from the ownership or non owner-ship of real estate play an important in the establishment of classes. Weber further argued that skills of an individual shape his worth in the market. A person?s market value is formed on the basis of skills that he possesses or offers in a market place. The higher the value of the skills he possesses, the higher would be worth of a person in a market place. Hence, in the other words, we can also say that different occupations enable individuals with different skills to get the most out of their skills and qualities they possess in a market. In a way, we can also say that social class can also be determined by the nature of occupation and skills that an individual possess. This relationship between occupation and skills can earn different rewards to an individual and therefore, chances are high that a person would earn a better lifestyle and life chances. Furthermore, according to Weber the fundamental concepts of status groups and parties also play an important role in the formation of social groups. These are the most important elements of the society which cannot be ignored in the formation of a society which is based on social groups. Status groups can be defined as the groups which enjoy equal and similar opportunities, social honor and other social benefits. On the other hand, parties can be termed as the groups which possess common political interests. However, it is important to understand that variations or similarities may occur between status groups and parties when it comes to serving the same social class or society as whole. Haralambos and Holbron (2004) suggest that this relation can create further division within the classes. On the other hand, we also see that this idea or the concept contradicts Marx?s idea that working or the labor class would soon recognize their value and would understand inequality and unjust attitude adopted against them by capitalist class. Several questions are raised after viewing criticisms on Marx and Marxist theories that why labor class has never strived to be recognized as a class itself and further, what appeals middle-class or other classes to grow and advance themselves rather than “mellowing” themselves with the working class (Haralambos and Holborn, 2004). Not just Marxist theories are faced with strong criticism but Weber?s theories have also been criticized by different scholars. According to Marx, Weber has placed extra stress on market position and value as well as he has completely ignored the important class division between capitalist class and the working class. Marx has further opposed the idea that status divisions are closely related to class division. It states that a class which possess greatest amount of wealth and other valuables enjoys and possess higher status and power in the society. Wealth and owning property play a significant role in determining the social status and social class of a group or a particular class. Observing all the theories and the concepts, it can be extracted that it is important to know and understand that how much influential is our class system in determining the strength of a particular society. On the other hand, it can be argued that whether or not; capitalist class can be termed as the ruling class in a society and whether the concept of social class can be worthy enough to be implemented in the modern world of today. There are many problems in identifying the number of different social classes in today?s modern society. There are many definitions and concepts for defining different class systems. Occupation plays an important role in determining the key factor of a social class especially in the modern times. But the scale of occupation varies just as the scale of social classes varies to identify the number of social classes on the basis of their social status. However, we know that upper class, middle class and lower class can be identified as the most distinguishing classes to be used as scales in order to analyze and understand the social structure or the class system in a society. Further, these categories of social classes are divided into different groups and sub-groups. It is a general understanding that working class is comprised of labor who prefer working manual such as masons or general labors, whereas, middle class is comprised of workers who enjoy non-manual occupations such as they are engineers, sales persons and many more, but on the other hand, upper class or the elite class is comprised of the groups who enjoy a certain higher social status from other two classes. Elite or the upper class own 7 percent of the total nation?s wealth and power. They can be termed as the ruling class however; the idea is not accepted by majority of the scholars (Haralambos and Holborn, 2004). Underclass is another social class that has been identified by some sociologists. Underclass is a class which is comprised of those individuals which are either unemployed, who have never worked in their lives or those who are given the weakest position in the market place due to lack of necessary skills and qualities. Such people are have low social status and are placed in the lowest grading. It is worth mentioning that sociologist W.G Runciman is the first one to identify seven-class model in a social structure. Runciman has described underclass as a group of individuals who have little or no contribution in economic mainstream and such individuals are benefited by the government in terms of funds as these individuals are unable to make any significant contributions in the market (Haralambos and Holborn, 2004). Single parents and other ethnic groups are placed under such group however, Runciman believed that these groups are not placed in this class according to their status but they are placed due to their dependence on benefits and funds granted to them by state. Runciman`s class model possess the basic components of Marxist and Weberian?s concept of social class and division. However, majority of sociologists have adopted either one or the other approach to define and prove their concept that is why these sociologists are often termed as neo-Weberians or neo-Marxists. On the other hand, we also have Wright?s model of social class. This model can also be termed as neo-Marxist. Wright?s concept also pin the most important question that has been discussed earlier as why the working class has failed to achieve the status of an individual class for itself and what are the basic factors that are contributing in the advancement of middle class. Wright also believed that middle class needs to establish themselves whereas the capitalist society remains polarized between the elite and the working class (Haralambos and Holborn, 2004). It has also been analyzed that other Marxist and neo-Marxist theorists have argued that all the white collar workers were previously categorized under middle class status due to their nature of work, wages they receive and social class they acquired. These types of workers are placed under the category of working class. However, neo-Weberians do not conform to this concept. There has been a lot of contradiction on the existence of underclass or the middle class, and the upper, elite or the ruling class in society. Majority of sociologists agree on the main concept that social class highlights the unequal and unjust distribution of wealth and other materialized things that gives social advantage to some specific classes. However, we also observe a clear difference of opinion between neo-Marxist and neo-Weberians that argue and question the composition of social classes and the issues that revolve around class inequality and unjust distribution of wealth which gives power and authority to specific groups. In other words, it is not appropriate to define social class merely as a system to differentiate the differences and similarities between different social groups that are categorized on the basis of lifestyle, occupation, opportunities, social advantages and attitudes. In fact, social class can be defined as a system which offers unlimited yet unjust opportunities and other social benefits to ones who enjoy higher positions in terms of wealth in a society. However, we also see that Marxists and Weberians mutually agree with the inequalities and opportunities given to different social classes. Bocock and Thompson (1995) suggest that social class system is further divided into different sub groups and categories on the basis of this inequality. On the other hand, other theorists define social system as a priority given to certain social classes on the basis of wealth and power distribution which is primarily enjoyed by the ruling class. From the above discussion, we can say that social class system is ingrained in our society which is why different theorists and scholars have emphasized on the existence of the social classes and their divisions in the society. But on the whole, we cannot deny the fact that the kind of system that is established in our society has caused much damaged to the ones who belong to underclass or low class system. Social class system or social division has adversely affected the structure of the society which has made the richest person to avail all the social benefits thus, depriving the individual belonging from a lower class to suffer due to lack of opportunities. List of References: Bocock, R & Thompson, K 1992, Social and Cultural Forms of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press in association with the Open University. Bilton, T. et al., 1994. Introductory Sociology, 2nd edn, Macmillan, London. Fulcher, J & Scott, J 1999, Sociology, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Haralambos, M & Holborn, M 2004, Sociology: Themes and Perspectives,  6th edn, HarperCollins, London. Ritzer, G 1996, Sociological Theory, 4th edn, McGraw-Hill, Singapore. Read More