Manifestations of inequality in modern society are examples. Social inequality, its types

It is quite obvious that the structure of any society is not homogeneous, since it is always divided into various groups according to national, class, gender, demographic and other characteristics. It is this type of heterogeneity that gives rise to such injustices in the social order as hidden violence and infringement of human dignity.

Of course, in modern world the forms of influence of some groups of people over others are no longer so pronounced, which was in the order of things in epic times. This happens because social hierarchy subordinated in a democratic society, first of all, to the principles of "European humanism", excluding any form of aggressive coercion outside the legal field.

General concept of social inequality

In the entire history of human existence, the most various models state, political and economic structure, under which it could not achieve that "golden balance" of the social order, when all individuals could be endowed with the same living conditions offered by society. And it is the concept of "social inequality" that determines the different levels of accessibility of various social groups to such resources as power, fame and finance.

It turns out that social stratification (a system of criteria for the stratification of society into various social groups) is objectively embedded in any model of human society, since only under the condition of class differences is society sufficiently motivated for its progressive development. After all, even with the primitive structure of primitive society, when the leaders ruled over clans or tribes, there was a clear hierarchy that implied the existence of power and subordinate structures.

With the development of society, the hierarchy of the social structure itself became more complex. Mankind not only developed economically and achieved continuous improvement of political forms of interaction, trying a variety of state levers of government, but has always been concerned about achieving an optimal balance between all social groups of the population. It is the balanced interaction between all strata of society that leads to the most effective development and comfortable conditions for interaction between them.

By the way, the historical experience of our country can also be considered an objective contribution to the global collection of knowledge on this issue. After all, communist society as an ideal form social justice never could be created. And at that stage of its construction, when developed socialism was to become a harbinger of the crown of social justice, society was stratified not only into the classes of workers and peasants proclaimed by the state (the intelligentsia was considered a stratum and a temporary phenomenon, and the partocracy was not classified into a separate group, associating itself with official classes), but also on those social structures who govern the people in all spheres of life.

It turns out that social inequality is an objectively determined instrument of any social structure, since it is precisely this that creates the necessary motivating structures for the normal development of mankind.

Causes of social inequality

Despite the many options for assessing social inequality from the legislators of the scientific community on this issue, including Herbert Spencer, Ludwig Gumplovich, William Sumner, Karl Marx and others, there are only two basic reasons for its occurrence.

The first of these is the uneven distribution of the material resources that society has at its disposal. It is the difference in assessing the contribution of each to the common treasury of human values ​​that is the fundamental reason for the generation of inequality. Naturally, each individual makes his own unique contribution to the development of society, which depends on his individual level of capabilities and the readiness of society to accept this work from him.

The second factor in the emergence of social inequality is the principle of inheritance of the rights to possess various values ​​and privileges, which provide additional opportunities for the distribution of various kinds of resources (power, prestige and money). Modern man in our country, for example, more than once faces the problem of employment, when, other things being equal, it is protectionism that becomes the decisive factor for occupying a position of interest or implementing a professional project.

The last reason for social inequality is based both on the unequal access to decent education for different social groups of the population, and on various professional start-ups with the same level of training. Here we can distinguish subjective and objective criteria, which are expressed in the possession of levels of material wealth, education, income, position and other resources. Despite the rather stable part of modern society, called the "middle class", the difference between other social groups in Russian society can truly be considered "mad". After all, the abyss between the oligarchs and the homeless cannot be considered justified just because some are managing the domestic economy, while others have even lost the meaning of their existence.

And even the middle class from Russia at the present time cannot be considered that part of modern society where social justice has triumphed, because this class today is only at the stage of formation. Moreover, the difference between conditionally its "elite" and "bottom" is also becoming striking, which eloquently indicates the relevance of this topic.

Separate words also deserve the apparatus of officials, which, by definition of the order of things, has an increased resource in the distribution of various benefits and privileges. After all, in connection with the positions they hold, these civil servants exercise appropriate control and supervision, which accordingly leads to their status.

In addition, it is important to remember the human essence itself, which has always been focused on climbing the social ladder, guided solely by the personal motive of achieving the most advantageous position in society.

Classification of types of social inequality

When considering the topic of social inequality, it is important to operate with such a concept as “social deprivation” (reducing the ability of an individual to communicate within society in functional and cultural aspects).

In this context, four categories of deprivation should be distinguished: economic, social, ethical and mental.

Economic deprivation follows from the uneven distribution of society's material resources. In this issue, two factors should be distinguished: objective and subjective. It is due to the presence of subjective deprivation that sometimes a situation arises when a completely sufficient person tends to feel underestimated of his abilities. Such a situation today is quite favorable ground for the creation, for example, of new religious movements.

Social deprivation uses such resources as power, prestige and money as a motivation for social development. This happens in order to distinguish individual groups of people from the general mass.

Ethical deprivation often occurs between society and intellectuals due to a value conflict of interests. This disagreement arises because moral ideals individual people and groups diverge from generally accepted norms.

Mental deprivation is similar to ethical deprivation. However, the disagreement between an individual or a group of people and society relates exclusively to such values ​​as the meaning of life, faith in God, the search for new life priorities. It should be understood that mental deprivation often results from economic or social deprivation and is aimed at leveling the objective forms of deprivation.

Adapting to social inequality

Despite the dissatisfaction of many members of society with social inequality, one should still take into account the universal nature of this tool for motivating the development of society throughout its existence.

Since social stratification is objectively determined by economic, political and state norms for the development of society, then it should be perceived solely as an inevitable cost. historical development. Of course, unequal access to the material and spiritual values ​​of public consumption causes a lot of indignation among the “disadvantaged” group of people.

However, one should always remember that today the socio-economic heterogeneity of labor and the inheritance of predominant positions in social stratification objectively determined by the historical facts of the development of society. So the only way to achieve social justice should be considered a gratuitous and feasible contribution of everyone to its development. In addition, modern society is developing quite seriously in the field of fixing and expanding the rights and privileges of poorly protected sections of society. So there is a positive trend in this aspect of society's life.

In this statement, I. Sherr raises the problem of the naturalness of social inequality. In other words, the author considers the state of society to be absolutely organic, in which some individuals have wider access to benefits than the rest of the society.

I fully share this thesis. Indeed, society consists of many social strata that are distinguished in the process of social stratification.

There are many criteria for dividing society into layers, but it is necessary to remember, first of all, the four main ones - income, power, education and prestige.

In addition, there are historical types of stratification, many of which have fixed social inequality for centuries. Basically, there are four of them. The first type - the slave system - is characterized by the fact that a certain part of society (slaves) was a "thing" of other people. The second type - the caste system - was based on religious principles and traditions and fixed hereditary affiliation to a caste without any opportunity to use the social elevator (curry in the war, marry a representative of a higher caste). The next type - the estate system - had the apparatus of coercion of state power as a support, fixing legal status of one class or another in official documents. This type allowed in exceptional cases to "increase" the privilege of one's status.

Fortunately, social progress led us to open system stratification - class. In this system, individuals were able to move freely to another social stratum. The basis of the division between classes is the form and size of a person's income. Therefore, they distinguish the class of proletarians (wage workers who receive wages) and the bourgeoisie (the class of entrepreneurs who make a profit, including from the exploitation of wage labor). As we can see, even in open stratification systems, social inequality is observed: individuals who put a lot of effort into working with social lifts (education, career, service) are higher on the social ladder than less active members of society. It should be mentioned that the intensity and speed social mobility in modern societies is much higher than in the historical types described above.

Examples of social inequality can be easily found in classical literature. For example, in Jack London's Martin Eden main character makes a long way up the social ladder from a poor sailor to a rich writer, along the way helping his poor friends to increase income. Having obtained a "ticket to high society", the hero realizes that rich people are not always complacent and people who are poor in prosperity were much more kind to him. This is also a kind of "stratification according to morality", but it is already outside the scope of the course of social science.

Sometimes social inequality reaches threatening scales for society. The Russian Reporter newspaper recently published an analytical article about the country of Zimbabwe, showing depressing economic indicators. It is worth noting that this country has withdrawn the national currency from circulation. High level corruption and crime allows officials and some businessmen to receive fabulous incomes, while more than half of the people are officially unemployed. This example shows us that even the natural state of society, manifested in inequality, needs to be controlled so that society does not turn into chaos.

Thus, the problem of the naturalness of social inequality is relevant to this day, having a scientific and factual justification. And I hope that society will be "unequal" where necessary!

Updated: 2017-07-10

Attention!
If you notice an error or typo, highlight the text and press Ctrl+Enter.
Thus, you will provide invaluable benefit to the project and other readers.

Thank you for your attention.

INTRODUCTION

Among the most important theoretical problems of sociology is the problem of social inequality. Social inequality has existed throughout human history.

All developed societies are characterized by an unequal distribution of material and spiritual wealth, rewards and opportunities. Social inequality can be generated by people's belonging to certain social, professional and socio-demographic groups. Even natural genetic or physical differences between people can cause unequal relationships.

In all ages, many scientists have thought about the nature of relations between people, about the plight of most people, about the problem of the oppressed and the oppressors, about the justice or injustice of inequality. Even the ancient philosopher Plato reflected on the stratification of people into rich and poor. He believed that the state is, as it were, two states. One is the poor, the other is the rich, and they all live together, plotting each other all sorts of intrigues. In such a society, people are haunted by fear and uncertainty. A healthy society must be different.

1. Social inequality

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

In the very general view inequality means that people live in conditions in which they have unequal access to limited resources of material and spiritual consumption.

Fulfilling qualitatively unequal working conditions, satisfying social needs to varying degrees, people sometimes find themselves engaged in economically heterogeneous labor, because such types of labor have a different assessment of their social utility. Considering the dissatisfaction of members of society with the existing system of distribution of power, property and conditions for individual development, one must still keep in mind the universality of people's inequality.

The main mechanisms of social inequality are the relations of property, power (domination and subordination), social (i.e., socially fixed and hierarchized) division of labor, as well as uncontrolled, spontaneous social differentiation. These mechanisms are mainly associated with the features market economy, with inevitable competition (including in the labor market) and unemployment. Social inequality is perceived and experienced by many people (primarily the unemployed, economic migrants, those who are at or below the poverty line) as a manifestation of injustice. Social inequality, property stratification of society, as a rule, lead to an increase in social tension, especially in the transition period. This is what is characteristic of Russia today.

2. Essence of social inequality

The essence of social inequality lies in the unequal access of different categories of the population to socially significant benefits, scarce resources, and liquid values. The essence of economic inequality is that a minority of the population always owns most of the national wealth. In other words, the smallest part of society receives the highest incomes, and the majority of the population receives the average and the smallest.

Inequality characterizes society as a whole, poverty characterizes only part of the population. Depending on the level of economic development of the country, poverty covers a significant or insignificant part of the population.

To measure the scale of poverty, sociologists identify specific gravity that portion of a country's population (usually expressed as a percentage) that lives near the official poverty line, or threshold. The terms “poverty rate”, “poverty line” and “poverty ratio” are also used to indicate the scale of poverty.

The poverty threshold is the amount of money (usually expressed, for example, in dollars or rubles) officially set as the minimum income that an individual or family needs only to buy food, clothing and housing. It is also called the "poverty level". In Russia, he received an additional name - living wage.

Sociology distinguishes between absolute and relative poverty.

Absolute poverty is understood as such a state in which an individual is not able to satisfy even the basic needs for food, housing, clothing, warmth, or is able to satisfy only the minimum needs that ensure biological survival on his income. The numerical criterion here is the poverty threshold (living wage).

Relative poverty is understood as the inability to maintain a decent standard of living, or some standard of living accepted in a given society. Typically, relative poverty is less than half the average household income in a given country. Relative poverty indicates how poor a particular individual or family is compared to other people. It is a comparative characteristic in two parameters. First, it shows that a person (family) is poor in relation to the abundance or prosperity that other members of society who are not considered poor have. The first meaning of relative poverty is the comparison of one stratum with other strata or strata. Secondly, it shows that a person (family) is poor in relation to some standard of living, for example, the standard of a decent, or befitting, life.

The lower limit of relative poverty is the subsistence minimum or the poverty threshold, and the upper limit is the so-called decent standard of living. A decent standard of living reflects the amount of material wealth that allows a person to satisfy all reasonable needs, lead a fairly comfortable lifestyle, and not feel disadvantaged.

A level of decent or “normal” life that is universal for all strata and social groups simply does not exist. For each class and category of the population, it has its own, and the range of values ​​is very significant.

3. Causes of social inequality

Functionalism explains inequality based on the differentiation of social functions performed by different strata, classes, and communities. The functioning and development of society is possible only thanks to the division of labor, when each social group carries out the solution of the corresponding vital tasks for the entire integrity: some are engaged in the production of material goods, others create spiritual values, others manage, etc. For the normal functioning of society, an optimal combination of all types of human activity. Some of them are more important, others are less. So, on the basis of the hierarchy of social functions, a corresponding hierarchy of classes, layers that perform them is formed. Those who carry out the general leadership and administration of the country are invariably placed at the top of the social ladder, for only they can support and ensure the unity of society, create the necessary conditions for the successful performance of other functions.

Observations of the actions and behavior of specific individuals gave impetus to the development of a status explanation of social inequality. Each person, occupying a certain place in society, acquires his own status. Social inequality is an inequality of status arising both from the ability of individuals to perform a particular social role (for example, to be competent to manage, to have the appropriate knowledge and skills to be a doctor, lawyer, etc.), and from the opportunities allowing a person to achieve one or another position in society (ownership of property, capital, origin, belonging to influential political forces).

Consider an economic view of the problem. In accordance with this point of view, the root cause of social inequality lies in the unequal attitude to property, the distribution of material wealth. This approach manifested itself most clearly in Marxism. According to him, it was the emergence of private property that led to the social stratification of society, the formation of antagonistic classes. The exaggeration of the role of private property in the social stratification of society led Marx and his followers to the conclusion that it is possible to eliminate social inequality by establishing public ownership of the means of production.

The lack of a unified approach to explaining the origins of social inequality is due to the fact that it is always perceived at least at two levels. First, as a property of society. Written history knows no societies without social inequality. The struggle of people, parties, groups, classes is a struggle for the possession of greater social opportunities, advantages and privileges. If inequality is an inherent property of society, then it carries a positive functional load. Society reproduces inequality because it needs it as a source of life support and development.

Secondly, inequality is always perceived as unequal relations between people, groups. Therefore, it becomes natural to seek to find the origins of this unequal position in the peculiarities of a person's position in society: in the possession of property, power, in the personal qualities of individuals. This approach is now widely used.

Inequality has many faces and manifests itself in various parts of a single social organism: in the family, in an institution, at an enterprise, in small and large social groups. It is necessary condition organization of social life. Parents, having an advantage in experience, skills, and financial resources in comparison with their young children, have the opportunity to influence the latter, facilitating their socialization. The functioning of any enterprise is carried out on the basis of the division of labor into managerial and subordinate-executive. The appearance of a leader in the team helps to unite it, turn it into a stable formation, but at the same time it is accompanied by the granting of special rights to the leader.

4. Types of social inequality

We can distinguish inequality on a number of grounds:

I) Inequality based on physical characteristics, which can be divided into three types of inequalities: 1) Inequality based on physical differences; 2) Sexual inequality; 3) Age inequality;

The reasons for the first inequality include belonging to any race, nationality, a certain height, fullness or thinness of the body, hair color, and even blood type. Very often, the distribution of social benefits in a society depends on some physical characteristic. Inequality is especially pronounced if the carrier of the trait is included in the “minority group”. Very often a minority group is discriminated against. One type of this inequality is "racism". Some sociologists believe that the cause of ethnic inequality is economic competition. Proponents of this approach emphasize the role of competition between groups of workers for scarce jobs. People who have jobs (especially those in lower positions) feel threatened by those who seek them. When the latter are members of ethnic groups, hostility may arise or intensify. Also, one of the reasons for the inequality of ethnic inequality can be considered personal qualities individual, showing which he considers another race inferior.

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

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

II) Inequality due to differences in prescribed statuses

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

III) Inequality Based on Ownership of Wealth

IV) Inequality based on the tenure of power

V) Inequality of prestige

VI) Cultural-symbolic inequality.

3.1 Social classes

Although social class is one of the central concepts in sociology, scientists still do not have a single point of view regarding the content of this concept. For the first time we find a detailed picture of class society in the works of K. Marx. It can be said that Marx's social classes are economically determined and genetically conflicting groups. The basis of division into groups is the presence or absence of property. The feudal lord and the serf in a feudal society, the bourgeois and the proletarian in a capitalist society are antagonistic classes that inevitably appear in any society that has a complex hierarchical structure based on inequality.

Despite the revision, from the point of view of modern society, of many provisions of the class theory of K. Max, some of his ideas remain relevant in relation to the currently existing social structures. This primarily applies to situations of interclass conflicts, clashes, and class struggle to change the conditions for the distribution of resources. In this regard, Marx's teaching on the class struggle currently has a large number of followers among sociologists and political scientists in many countries of the world.

Social inequality - This is a type of social division in which individual members of a society or group are at different levels of the social ladder (hierarchy) and have unequal opportunities, rights and obligations.

Main indicators of inequality:

• different levels of access to resources, both physical and moral (for example, women in Ancient Greece, who were not allowed to participate in the Olympic Games);
• various conditions labor.

Causes of social inequality.

The French sociologist Émile Durkheim deduced two causes of social inequality:

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

Robert Michels put forward another reason: the protection of the privileges of power. When the size of the community exceeds a certain number of people, they put forward a leader, or a whole group, and give him more authority than everyone else.

Criteria of social inequality.

Key inequality criteria Max Weber stated:

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

Hierarchy of inequality.

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

Solving the problem of social inequality.

It is natural that social inequality is perceived as social injustice, especially by those who are in the hierarchy of social division at the lowest level. IN modern society the issue of social inequality is in the introduction of the bodies of social policy. Their responsibilities include:

1. Introduction of various compensations for socially unprotected segments of the population.
2. Help poor families.
3. Benefit for the unemployed.
4. Determining the minimum wage.
5. Social insurance.
6. Development of education.
7. Healthcare.
8. Ecological problems .
9. Raising the qualifications of workers.

Aspects of inequality

Inequality in human society acts as one of the topical objects sociological research. Its reasons also lie in several main aspects.

Inequality initially implies different opportunities and unequal access to available social and material goods. Among these benefits are the following:

1. Income - represents a certain amount of money that a person receives per unit of time. Often, income is directly wage, which is paid for the labor produced by a person and the physical or mental strength expended. In addition to labor, it can also be the ownership of property that “works”. Thus, the lower the income of a person, the lower he is in the hierarchy of society;
2. Education is a complex of knowledge, skills and abilities acquired by a person during his stay in educational institutions. The level of education is measured by the number of years of education. They can range from 9 years (incomplete high school). For example, a professor may have more than 20 years of education behind him, respectively, he will be much higher in level than a person who has completed 9 classes;
3. Power - the ability of an individual to impose his worldview, point of view on the wider population, regardless of their desire. The level of power is measured by the number of people to whom it extends;
4. Prestige is a position in society and its assessment, which has developed on the basis of public opinion.

Causes of social inequality

For a long time, many researchers have wondered whether a society can exist in principle if there is no inequality or hierarchy in it. In order to answer this question, it is necessary to understand the causes of social inequality.

Different approaches interpret this phenomenon and its causes in different ways. Let's analyze the most influential and famous.

Remark 1

Functionalism explains the phenomenon of inequality in terms of diversity social functions. These functions are inherent in different layers, classes and communities.

Functioning, development public relations are possible only if there is a division of labour. In this situation, each social group carries out the solution of vital tasks for the whole society. Some are engaged in the creation and production of material goods, while the activities of others are aimed at creating spiritual values. We also need a control layer that will control the activities of the first two - hence the third follows.

For the successful functioning of society, a combination of all three of the above types of human activity is simply necessary. Some are the most important, and some are the least. Thus, on the basis of function hierarchies, a hierarchy of classes and layers that perform them is formed.

Status explanation of social inequality. It is based on observations of the actions and behavior of specific individuals. As we understand, every person who takes certain place in society, automatically acquires its status. Hence the opinion that social inequality is, first of all, inequality of statuses. It follows both from the ability of individuals to fulfill a certain role, and from the possibilities that allow a person to achieve a certain position in society.

In order for an individual to perform one or another social role, he needs to have certain skills, abilities and qualities (to be competent, sociable, to have the appropriate knowledge and skills to be a teacher, an engineer). Opportunities that allow a person to achieve a particular position in society are, for example, in the ownership of property, capital, origin from a well-known and wealthy family, belonging to a high class or political forces.

An Economic Perspective on the Causes of Social Inequality. In accordance with this daughter of view, the main cause of social inequality lies in the unequal attitude to property, the distribution of material wealth. This approach manifested itself most clearly under Marxism, when it was the emergence of private property that led to the social stratification of society and the formation of antagonistic classes.

Problems of social inequality

Social inequality is a very common phenomenon, and therefore, like many other manifestations in society, it faces a number of problems.

First, the problems of inequality arise simultaneously in two of the most developed areas of society: in the public and economic spheres.

When we talk about inequalities in public sphere, then it is worth mentioning the following manifestations of instability:

1. Uncertainty in one's future, as well as in the stability of the position in which the individual is now;
2. Suspension of production due to dissatisfaction on the part of various segments of the population, which leads to a lack of production for the rest;
3. The growth of social tension, which can lead to such consequences as unrest, social conflicts;
4. The absence of real social elevators that will allow you to move up the social ladder both from the bottom up and vice versa - from the top down;
5. Psychological pressure due to the feeling of unpredictability of the future, the lack of clear forecasts for further development.

In the economic sphere, the problems of social inequality are expressed as follows: an increase in government spending on the production of certain goods or services, a partially unfair distribution of income (not those who really work and use their physical strength receive, but those who invest more cash), respectively, another significant problem comes from here - unequal access to resources.

Remark 2

The peculiarity of the problem of inequality of access to resources lies in the fact that it is both a cause and a consequence of modern social inequality.