Compare the Functionalist and Marxist Views on Social Stratification

Assess the usefulness of Marxist theories of stratification in understanding social class in society today.

Social inequality is a problematic phenomenon that occurs all around the world and affects both the developed and developing nations. It is defined as “the unequal distribution of social, political and economic resources within a social collective” (van Krieken et al. 2013, p. 205). Inequality is closely connected with social stratification, a system of social hierarchy that positions individuals and groups into categories according to social variables such as class or ethnicity (van Krieken et al. 2013, p. 485). This stratification has a significant impact on the opportunity that an individual may have to move up the hierarchy of inequality (Gill 2017a).

In this essay I am going to compare and contrast Functionalism and Marxism. They are both sociological perspectives which have theories about society and the people that live within it. They attempt to explain how society influences people, and similarly how people influence society. However, the two perspectives are clearly different.

The Functionalist theory believes that society functions so that each individual plays a specific role. Their perspective of social inequality is the belief that "inequality is not only inevitable but also necessary for the smooth functioning of society."

Theory: connect it to the symbolic-Interaction Theory. The micro level analysis of social stratification is important because people’s social standings affect their everyday life. Rich people do not want to hang with homeless people. Everyone thinks highly of themselves that poor people just don’t want to work and are lazy is not surprising. Because of their social standing, they try to justify inequality.

Social inequality is the reality of unequal chances and rewards for diverse social positions or categories

Social Inequality refers to any difference between groups or individuals in society which results in one having inferior life chances than the other. Functionalists believe these inequalities are the result of the meritocracy we live in. This is a system based on the idea that social stratification is necessary and desirable for the society. Functionalists argue that inequalities have a purpose; they are functional for society. Functionalism is a structural theory based on the notion that society is based on shared values. This consensus means that society will be in a state of equilibrium and there is harmony, as a result of which there will be social solidarity.

Functionalist argue that stratification is "necessary and beneficial" to a society to ensure the highest qualified individuals will fill the best societal positions. Inequality in the

Social stratification is defined as a system by which society ranks categories of people in a hierarchy. For example, There are fundamental principles of stratification:

(Turner, p.112) Functional analysis established itself as a way of ‘bringing to light the significance of the institutional order and connecting it with the unintentional consequences of social action. (Turner, p.121) On page 35 of Back et al. it states that Durkheim’s argument is that classification is a process of ‘marking-off’, of showing things that are related, but have distinct points of difference to another. Functionalism assumes that society’s social institutions perform important functions to help ensure social stability. Rapid social change threatens social order, but slow social change is desirable.

Social Stratification is a term used by sociologists to describe inequalities that exist between society and us as individuals and can also be described as a hierarchy with the less privileged people at the bottom and the more favoured people at the top. (Giddens, 2006)

The 21-st century is characterized by the continuous economic downfall. The relationship between race, class and gender should be evaluated to identify the life chances of people to improve their relative position in our socially stratified world. The increased rates of unemployment, homelessness and poverty show that our society requires implementing a transformative approach to reduce social stratification. The term social stratification is applied to identify and asses different forms of inequality that exist in the US society. Patricia H Collins suggests, “while a piece of the oppressor may be planted deep within each of us, we each have the choice of accepting that piece or challenging it as part of the 'true focus of revolutionary change'” (p. 680). Inequality has become a universal feature of our society; therefore, it exists everywhere and concerns race, class, and gender as the key categories of society.

In was during medieval Britain that feudalism ruled the land. The social hierarchy was labelled as estates and it was the private ownership of the land that differentiated the estates from one another. Those in the higher estates who controlled ownership of the land had more legal rights and luxuries than those from the lower estate. Those from the lower estates had a legal obligation by law to fulfil duties to those whom were above them. Any ownership of private land was ascribed at birth and there was very little social upward mobility. It was then that society went through a drastic and fast transformation. The introduction of new machinery created a prominent industrial society which created a capitalist society. It was then for the first time that most of the work took place amongst factories. The work was then divided into specialised areas and overlooked by managers. Throughout this capitalist era societies were referred to as modern societies (Cohen & Kennedy: 2007).

Social stratification can be simply defined by stating that it is a system in which a society ranks categories of people in a hierarchy (Macionis, page 224). The concept of social stratification is based on four central principles, which are social stratification is a trait of society, not simply a reflection of individual differences, it carries over from one generation to the next, while it is universal, it is also variable, and social stratification involves not only inequality but beliefs as well (Macionis, pages 224-225). The first principle, that social stratification is a trait of society, not simply a reflection of individual differences, basically says that children born into wealthy families are more likely to be of good health, do well in school, succeed in a career, and live a long life (Macionis, pages 224-225). An example of this first principle can be seen in the what happened to the Titanic. The first-class passengers survived not because they were better swimmers than the second- and third-class passengers, but because of their privileged position (Macionis, page 224-225). The second principle states that the concept of social stratification is one that carries over from one generation to the next (Macionis, page 225). This concept is essentially stating that the social standing of a person is partially determined by their parents. Most people’s social standing remains constant throughout their lives (Macionis, page 225). While social stratification is

This paper will be discussing “Some Principles of Stratification” by Kingsley Davis and Wilbert E. Moore, “Classes in Capitalism and Pre- Capitalism” by Karl Marx, and “Who Rules America?” by G. William Domhoff. Davis and Moore examine stratification, social class, and positional rank and their effects on individuals and society. Marx examines inequality in society, the relationship between the oppressor and the oppressed or the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, and methods of production and their effects on society. Domhoff examines the roles of corporate communities and the upper class and how they impact America.