Types and types of social stratification. Social stratification: concept, criteria and types

If we look at the social structure of society as a complex of social groups that have striking differences from each other, sociologists are obliged to answer the question of how to distinguish these groups from each other. Stratification studies this issue in social science. This is a system of verified features, according to which an individual is assigned to a certain group. It is about this social phenomenon that we will talk today.

Theory of stratification

In order to be able to distinguish between social groups, as well as to study them, the theory of social stratification was developed in the early 40s of the twentieth century. T. Parsons, R. Merton, K. Davis, W. Moore worked on its creation. Sociologists assured that stratification in social science is a process that was provoked by the spread of executable functions necessary for the life of society. According to them, due to social stratification in society, it is possible to distinguish ordered layers that were formed on the basis of important features.

It should also not be forgotten that the approach of social stratification is both a method and methodology for studying the social structure of society. It is based on the principles:

• Mandatory research of all public spending.
• The need for application in comparative analysis the same criteria.
• Applying a sufficient number of criteria that will allow for a deep analysis of the social stratum.

About stratification

The concept of "stratification" was taken from geology by Pitirim Sorokin. In social science, stratification is a process of social reproduction, during which all layers, classes, castes and groups are unequal, therefore they are forced to be placed in a hierarchical order. In other words, social stratification is the division of society into different groups of people who are united according to the same criteria. The main criteria for stratification in social science are the level of income, access to power and knowledge, the nature of work, and leisure activities.

Thus, economic, professional and political stratification are distinguished. But that's not all, stratification in social science is a source that allows you to determine the stable elements of the social structure. During historical development three types of stratification were formed.

castes

One of these types are castes. Literally translated from Portuguese, this word means "origin". That is, castes are understood as closed groups that are connected by origin and status. To become a member of this association, you need to be born in it, moreover, there is no possibility for representatives of different castes to marry. Simply put, the caste system is very limited, this is a place for those who are just lucky.

The most famous caste system is considered to be an example of stratification in India. According to legend, society was originally divided into 4 varnas, which were created from different parts bodies representing humans. So, the “mouths” of the society were brahmins (priests and scholars). The "hands" were kshatriyas (leaders and soldiers). The role of the "torso" was played by vaishyas (merchants and villagers), and the "feet" were considered sudras (dependent persons).

Estates

Another type of stratification in social science is called "estate". This is a special group of people whose rules of conduct, duties and rights are inherited. In contrast to the caste system, it is easier to become part of a certain estate, since this is a conscious choice of a person, and not the result of a fatal combination of circumstances. In the countries of Europe of the 18th-19th centuries, the following system of estates existed:

• Nobility - groups of people with special privileges, they were usually given different titles, such as duke, baron, prince, etc.
• Clergy - if you exclude the priests, then all the rest who served the church were considered clergy. In turn, it was divided into two types: "black" - all the monastic brethren, "white" - non-monastic people who remained faithful to church dogmas.
• Merchants - a cohort of people engaged in trade.
• Peasantry - people who have the basis labor activity was farming and agricultural labor.
• Philistinism - groups of people who live in cities, are engaged in crafts, trade or are in the service.

Classes

The definition of stratification in social science is impossible without the concept of "class". By class is meant a group of people that is distinguished by freedom of access to property. For the first time such a concept was introduced into social science by Karl Marx, he said that the position of an individual in society is determined by his access to material goods. This is how class disparities arose. If we look at specific historical examples, then only two classes were defined in the slave-owning community: slaves and their masters. The main strata of feudal society were the feudal lords and the peasants dependent on them.

However, in modern sociological sciences, classes are groups of individuals who are similar according to the criteria of political, economic, and socio-cultural affiliation. Therefore, in every modern society we can distinguish:

• Upper class (elite or rich people).
• Middle class (professionals in their field, employees, workers with qualifications).
• Lower class (unskilled workers, marginalized).
• Underclass (people at the very "bottom" of the system).

strata

Thus, we can say that the units of social stratification are strata - groups of people who are united according to a certain attribute. The concept of "stratum" is the most universal term that can be used to characterize both large classes of people and small groups that are united according to one criterion.

As for examples of stratification in social science, these can be representatives of the elite and the masses. As Pareto said, in every society there are 20% of the elite - people who lead public order and prevent anarchy. And 80% of the so-called masses are ordinary people who do not have access to public power.

Stratification is the criterion that is an indicator of the inequality that prevails in society. The division into groups shows how different conditions people live in society. They have different potential and access to social benefits. But in spite of everything, it is only through stratification that a detailed characterization of the social structure can be obtained.

Mobility

In social science, social stratification and mobility are inextricably linked concepts. Mobility refers to dynamic change. As Pitirim Sorokin said: “Social mobility is the process of moving an individual or another object (norm, value) to a different social plane.”

For example, a person can change his position in society, and at the same time begin to belong to another class. good example quality social mobility can be a trite story about how a poor guy became a millionaire.

Like social stratification, mobility has its varieties. First of all, vertical and horizontal mobility are distinguished.

Vertical mobility

Vertical mobility is a process that is characterized by changes that can be described as " better than that what was" or " worse than that, what happened". For example, a person received a promotion at work, a salary increase, or a higher education. These are positive changes, which are called upward mobility.

An example of downward mobility would be a dismissal, a demotion, or any other situation that changes circumstances for the worse.

Horizontal mobility

In addition to vertical mobility, there is also horizontal dynamics. If in the first case a person had the opportunity to move within his stratum, then in this case he moves exclusively within his own stratum.

For example, a programmer changed his job and moved to another city. He still belongs to the middle class of the population, he just changed his territorial position. Or if a person changes the specifics of work without a significant increase in earnings. For example, he worked as a secretary, and became an assistant accountant. The specifics of the work seem to be different, there are more responsibilities, and the salary has not changed significantly. Therefore, we can say that mobility is considered horizontal if a person changes his social group to one that is located at the same level.

Intergenerational and intragenerational mobility

This concept is more common in the countries of America, in particular in the States, where the public is of the opinion that the next generation should live better than the previous one. And anarchy is understood not as anarchy, which Durkheim spoke of, but as a discrepancy between needs and resources.

Intergenerational mobility is determined by the process in which a child takes the best or worst position in society than his parents. For example, if the parents were low-skilled workers and their child became a scientist, this is positive intergenerational mobility.

Intragenerational mobility is determined by the change in social status throughout the life span, regardless of the achievements of the parents.

Groups and people

Exploring the concepts of social mobility and stratification, it is difficult not to note such definitions as individual and group dynamics.

Group mobility deserves special attention - a dynamic process in which an entire estate, caste or class changes its position in society. For example, after the collapse of the USSR, when many factories stopped, engineers became unclaimed. A whole class of engineers was forced to change their specialization in a short time. This type of mobility is characteristic feature societies that are in a state of total change.

With individual mobility, each person independently changes his belonging to a particular stratum.

conclusions

In general, studies show that social mobility influences the political regime, the stages of modernization and the socio-economic situation in society. As well as the characteristics of the individual himself: his education, character, etc.

But what is stratification in social science? In simple words It is the division of society into rich and poor. And only then these rich and poor can be divided into strata with different characteristics. The social structure in any society is the main criterion that helps the society to evolve. Due to which strata prevail in a particular society, it is possible to determine which development strategy suits it best.

social society inequality stratification

social stratification- this is the division of society into social strata (strata) by combining various social positions with approximately the same social status, reflecting the prevailing idea of ​​​​social inequality in it, built vertically (social hierarchy), along its axis according to one or more stratification criteria (indicators of social status). In social stratification, a certain social distance is established between people (social positions) and unequal access of members of society to certain socially significant scarce resources is fixed by establishing social filters on the boundaries separating them. But in any case, social stratification is the result of a more or less conscious activity (policy) of the ruling elites, who are extremely interested in imposing on society and legitimizing in it their own social ideas about the unequal access of society members to social benefits and resources.

Theories of social stratification are based on the idea that a stratum is a real, empirically fixed community that unites people on the basis of some common positions or having a common cause, which leads to the construction of this community in social structure society and opposition to others social communities. Specific forms of social stratification arise from the intersection of two main factors - social differentiation and the dominant system of values ​​and cultural standards.

The foundations of the modern approach to the study of social stratification were laid by M. Weber, and later developed by T. Parsons, E. Shils, B. Barber, K. Davis, W. Moore and others.

In sociology today, two main approaches to the analysis and description of the social structure of society coexist: class and stratification. Their main difference lies in the features by which the differentiation of social groups is carried out. According to the class approach, classes are recognized as the main elements of the social structure. This approach is usually associated with Marxism and neo-Marxism. Its supporters understand classes as large objective groups of people determined by economic factors: their attitude to the means of production, their place in the system of division of labor, access to various benefits.

With a stratification approach, other criteria for dividing society are more important: place in the system of power, income distribution, level of education, prestige. The strata are formed according to the characteristics associated with the reproduction of the very status position of the individual, with a cultural and psychological assessment, which are realized in the individual behavior of their members.

When analyzing the social structure of a society, it must be remembered that the basis for distinguishing a stratum may not be any sign, but only one that objectively acquires a rank (status) character in a given society: “higher” - “lower”, “better” - “worse” , "prestigious" - "non-prestigious", etc.

Many stratification criteria are due to the variety of status positions in society. All statuses are divided into "assigned" (inherited) and "achievable" (acquired). Assigned statuses (sex, nationality, etc.) are of interest to sociologists only if they become sources of social privileges. For example, representatives of an indigenous nationality occupy best places in the job market. Achieved statuses are analyzed using economic, political, professional and other social criteria. Economic criteria traditionally include: the amount of income received, the standard of living achieved, the scale of accumulated property.

They are joined by professional criteria that fix the level of education and qualifications, official position and positions in the labor market. Each professional and economic position is, in turn, valued in terms of power and prestige. These social assessments are more subjective, but no less significant, since people tend to constantly rank those around them into “us” and “them”, “bosses” and ordinary workers.

Thus, social stratification is a structurally regulated inequality in which people are ranked according to the social significance that social roles and various activities have.

Rice. one

The distribution of social groups and people by strata (layers) makes it possible to identify relatively stable elements of the structure of society (Fig. 1) in terms of access to power (politics), professional functions performed and income received (economy). Three main types of stratification are presented in history - castes, estates and classes.

Rice. 2

Castes (from Portuguese casta - clan, generation, origin) are closed social groups connected by a common origin and legal status. Caste membership is determined solely by birth, and marriages between members of different castes are forbidden. The most famous is the caste system of India, originally based on the division of the population into four varnas (in Sanskrit this word means “kind, genus, color”). According to legend, varnas were formed from different parts of the body of the primordial man, who was sacrificed.

Estates - social groups whose rights and obligations, enshrined in law and tradition, are inherited. Below are the main estates characteristic of Europe in the 18th-19th centuries:

• § the nobility -- a privileged estate from among the large landowners and the ranks of officials. An indicator of nobility is usually a title: prince, duke, count, marquis, viscount, baron, etc.;
• § clergy - ministers of worship and the church, with the exception of priests. In Orthodoxy, black clergy (monastic) and white (non-monastic) are distinguished;
• § merchants - the trading class, which included the owners of private enterprises;
• § the peasantry - the estate of farmers engaged in agricultural labor as the main profession;
• § philistinism - the urban estate, consisting of artisans, small merchants and lower employees.

In some countries, a military estate was distinguished (for example, chivalry). V Russian Empire the Cossacks were sometimes referred to as a special estate. Unlike the caste system, marriages between members of different classes are permissible. It is possible (although difficult) to move from one class to another (for example, the purchase of the nobility by a merchant).

Classes(from lat. classis - category) - large groups of people, differing in their attitude to property. The German philosopher Karl Marx (1818-1883), who proposed the historical classification of classes, pointed out that important criterion distinguishing classes is the position of their members - oppressed or oppressed:

• § in a slave-owning society, these were slaves and slave-owners;
• § in feudal society - feudal lords and dependent peasants;
• § in a capitalist society - capitalists (bourgeoisie) and workers (proletariat);
• § there will be no classes in a communist society.

In modern sociology, one often speaks of classes in the most general sense, as collections of people with similar life chances, mediated by income, prestige, and power:

• § upper class: divided into upper upper class (rich people from "old families") and lower upper class (recently rich people);
• § middle class: divided into upper middle (professionals) and
• § lower middle (skilled workers and employees); The lower class is divided into an upper lower class (unskilled workers) and a lower lower class (lumpen and marginals).

The lower lower class are groups of the population that, for various reasons, do not fit into the structure of society. In fact, their representatives are excluded from the social class structure, so they are also called declassed elements.

Strata - groups of people with similar characteristics in a social space. This is the most universal and broadest concept, which makes it possible to single out any fractional elements in the structure of society according to a set of various socially significant criteria. For example, such strata as elite specialists, professional entrepreneurs, government officials, office workers, skilled workers, unskilled workers, etc. are distinguished. Classes, estates and castes can be considered varieties of strata.

Social stratification reflects the presence of inequality in society. It shows that strata exist in different conditions and people have different opportunities to meet their needs. Inequality is the source of stratification in society. Thus, inequality reflects differences in the access of representatives of each layer to social benefits, and stratification is a sociological characteristic of the structure of society as a set of layers.

The main feature of the human community is social inequality arising from social differences, social differentiation.

Social differences are called differences that are generated by social factors: the division of labor (workers of mental and physical labor), way of life (urban and rural population), functions performed, level of prosperity, etc. Social differences are, first of all, status differences. They indicate the dissimilarity of the functions performed by a person in society, the different opportunities and positions of people, the discrepancy between their rights and obligations.

Social differences may or may not be compatible with natural ones. It is known that people differ in gender, age, temperament, height, hair color, intelligence level and many other characteristics. Differences between people, due to their physiological and mental characteristics, are called natural.

The leading trend in the evolution of any society is the multiplication of social differences, i.e. increasing their diversity. The process of growing social differences in society was called by G. Spencer "social differentiation".

This process is based on:

the emergence of new institutions, organizations that help people jointly decide certain tasks and at the same time sharply complicating the system of social expectations, role interactions, functional dependencies;

· the complication of cultures, the emergence of new value ideas, the development of subcultures, which leads to the emergence within the same society of social groups that adhere to different religious, ideological views, focusing on different forces.

Many thinkers have long tried to figure out whether society can exist without social inequality, since too much injustice is due to social inequality: a narrow-minded person can be at the top of the social ladder, hardworking, gifted - all his life he can be content with a minimum of material wealth and constantly experience a dismissive attitude towards himself.

Differentiation is a property of society. Consequently, society reproduces inequality, considering it as a source of development and livelihood. Therefore, differentiation is a necessary condition for the organization of social life and performs a number of very important functions. On the contrary, universal equality deprives people of incentives to advance, the desire to apply their maximum efforts and abilities to fulfill their duties (they will consider that they receive no more for their work than they would receive if they did nothing all day).

What are the reasons that give rise to the differentiation of people in society? In sociology, there is no single explanation for this phenomenon. There are different methodological approaches to solving questions about the nature, origins and prospects of social differentiation.

functional approach (representatives T. Parsons, K. Davis, W. Moore) explain inequality based on differentiation social functions performed by different layers, classes, communities. The functioning and development of society is possible only thanks to the division of labor between social groups: one of them is engaged in the production of material goods, the other - in the creation of spiritual values, the third - in management, etc. For the normal functioning of society, an optimal combination of all types of human activity is necessary, but some of them, from the point of view of society, are more important, while others are less important.

On the basis of the hierarchy of significance of social functions, according to the supporters of the functional approach, a corresponding hierarchy of groups, classes, and layers performing these functions is formed. The top of the social ladder is invariably occupied by those who carry out the general leadership and administration of the country, because only they can maintain and ensure the unity of the country, create the necessary conditions for the successful implementation of other social functions. Top management positions should be filled by the most capable and qualified people.

However, the functional approach cannot explain the dysfunctions when certain roles are rewarded in no way in proportion to their weight and significance for society. For example, remuneration of persons employed in the service of the elite. Critics of functionalism emphasize that the conclusion about the usefulness of hierarchical construction contradicts the historical facts of clashes, conflicts of strata, which led to difficult situations, explosions and sometimes threw society back.

The functional approach also does not allow explaining the recognition of the individual as belonging to the highest stratum in the absence of his direct participation in management. That is why T. Parsons, considering the social hierarchy as a necessary factor, links its configuration with the system of dominant values ​​in society. In his understanding, the location of social strata on the hierarchical ladder is determined by the ideas formed in society about the significance of each of them and, therefore, can change as the value system itself changes.

The functional theory of stratification comes from:

1) the principle of equal opportunities;

2) the principle of survival of the fittest;

3) psychological determinism, according to which individual psychological qualities predetermine success in work - motivation, the need for achievement, intelligence, etc.

4) the principles of work ethics, according to which success in work is a sign of God's grace, failure is the result of only a lack good qualities etc.

As part of conflict approach (represented by K. Marx, M. Weber) inequality is seen as the result of the struggle of classes for the redistribution of material and social resources. Representatives of Marxism, for example, call private property the main source of inequality, which gives rise to the social stratification of society, the emergence of antagonistic classes that have an unequal relationship to the means of production. The exaggeration of the role of private property in the social stratification of society led K. Marx and his orthodox followers to the conclusion that it is possible to eliminate social inequality by establishing public ownership of the means of production.

The theory of social stratification by M. Weber is based on the theory of K. Marx, which he modifies and develops. According to M. Weber, the class approach depends not only on control over the means of production, but also on economic differences that are not directly related to property. These resources include the skills, credentials and qualifications that determine employment opportunities.

M. Weber's theory of stratification is based on three factors, or measurements (three components of social inequality):

1) economic status, or wealth, as the totality of all material values ​​belonging to a person, including his income, land and other types of property;

2) political status, or power as an opportunity to subordinate other people to one's will;

3) prestige - the basis of social status - as recognition and respect for the merits of the subject, a high assessment of his actions, which are a role model.

The discrepancies between the teachings of Marx and Weber lie in the fact that Marx considered ownership of the means of production and the exploitation of labor as the main criteria for the formation of classes, while Weber considered ownership of the means of production and the market. For Marx, classes existed always and everywhere, where and when there was exploitation and private property, i.e. when the state existed, and capitalism only in modern times. Weber associated the concept of class only with capitalist society. Class for Weber is inextricably linked with the exchange of goods and services through money. Where there are none, there are no classes. Market exchange acts as a regulator of relations only under capitalism; therefore, classes exist only under capitalism. That is why traditional society is the arena of action of status groups, and only modern society is of classes. According to Weber, classes cannot appear where there are no market relations.

In the 1970s and 1980s, the tendency to synthesize functional and conflict approaches became widespread. It found its fullest expression in the works of American scientists Gerhard and Zhdin Lenski, who formulated evolutionary approach to the analysis of social differentiation. They showed that stratification was not always necessary and useful. In the early stages of development, there was practically no hierarchy. Later it appeared as a result of natural needs, partly on the basis of the conflict that arises as a result of the distribution of the surplus product. In an industrial society, it is based mainly on the consensus of values ​​of those in power and ordinary members of society. In this regard, rewards are both fair and unfair, and stratification can promote or hinder development, depending on specific historical conditions and situations.

Most modern sociologists emphasize that social differentiation is hierarchical and is a complex, multifaceted social stratification.

social stratification- the division of society into vertically located social groups and strata (strata), the placement of people in the status hierarchy from top to bottom according to four main criteria of inequality: prestige of the profession, unequal income, access to power, level of education.

The term "stratification" comes from the Latin stratum- layer, layer and fatio - I do. Thus, in the etymology of the word, the task is not simply to identify group diversity, but to determine the vertical sequence of the position of social strata, layers in society, their hierarchy. Some authors often replace the concept of "stratum" with other terms: class, caste, estate.

Stratification is a feature of any society. Reflects the presence of upper and lower strata of society. And its basis and essence is the uneven distribution of privileges, responsibilities and duties, the presence or absence of social laws and influence on power.

One of the authors of the theory of social stratification was P. Sorokin. He outlined it in the work "Social Stratification and Mobility". According to P. Sorokin, social stratification - it is the differentiation of the entire set of people (population) into classes in a hierarchical rank. It finds expression in the existence of higher and lower strata, Its basis and essence - in the uneven distribution of rights and privileges, responsibilities and duties, the presence or absence of social values, power and influence among the members of society.

Sorokin P. pointed out the impossibility of giving a single criterion for belonging to any stratum and noted the presence in society of three stratification grounds (respectively, three types of criteria, three forms of social stratification): economic, professional and political. They are closely intertwined, but do not merge completely, so Sorokin spoke about economic, political and professional strata and classes. If an individual moved from the lower class to the middle class, increased his income, then he made the transition, moved in the economic space.

If he changed his profession or occupation - in the professional, if the party affiliation - in the political. An owner with a large fortune, significant economic power, could not formally be included in the highest echelons of political power, not be engaged in professionally prestigious activities. And vice versa, a politician who made a dizzying career could not be the owner of capital, which, nevertheless, did not prevent him from moving in the upper strata of society. Professional stratification manifests itself in two main forms: a hierarchy of professional groups (interprofessional stratification) and stratification in the middle of professional groups.

The theory of social stratification was created in the early 40s. 20th century American sociologists Talcott Parsons, Robert-King Merton, K. Davis and other scientists who believed that the vertical classification of people is caused by the distribution of functions in society. In their opinion, social stratification ensures the allocation of social strata according to certain signs important for a particular society: the nature of property, income, power, education, prestige, national and other features. The social stratification approach is both a methodology and a theory for considering the social structure of society.

It adheres to the basic principles:

Compulsory research of all strata of society;

The use of a single criterion for their comparison;

Sufficiency of criteria for a complete and in-depth analysis of each of the studied social stratum.

Subsequently, sociologists have made repeated attempts to expand the number of grounds for stratification at the expense of, for example, the level of education. The stratification picture of society is multifaceted, it consists of several layers that do not completely coincide with each other.

Critics of the Marxist concept opposed the absolutization of the criterion of relation to the means of production, property and a simplified idea of ​​the social structure as the interaction of two classes. They referred to the diversity of strata, to the fact that history provides an example not only of the aggravation of relations between strata, but also of convergence, erasure of contradictions.

The Marxist doctrine of classes as the basis of the social structure of society in modern Western sociology is opposed by more productive theories of social stratification. Representatives of these theories argue that the concept of "class" in modern post-industrial society "does not work", because in modern conditions on the basis of wide corporatization, as well as the exit of the main owners of shares from the sphere of management and their replacement by hired managers, property relations turned out to be blurred, as a result of which they lost their former significance.

Therefore, representatives of the theory of social stratification believe that the concept of "class" in modern society should be replaced by the concept of "stratum" or the concept of "social group", and the theory of the social class structure of society should be replaced by a more flexible theory of social stratification.

It should be noted that almost all modern theories social stratification is based on the idea that a stratum (social group) is a real, empirically fixed social community that unites people according to some common positions, which leads to the constitution of this community in the social structure of society and opposition to other social communities. Thus, the basis of the theory of social stratification is the principle of uniting people into groups and opposing them to other groups according to status signs: power, property, professional, educational.

At the same time, leading Western sociologists offer different criteria for measuring social stratification. The French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, when considering this issue, took into account not only economic capital, measured in terms of property and income, but also cultural (education, special knowledge, skills, lifestyle), social (social ties), symbolic (authority, prestige, reputation). The German-English sociologist R. Dahrendorf proposed his own model of social stratification, which was based on such a concept as "authority".

Based on this, he divides the entire modern society into managers and managed. In turn, he divides managers into two subgroups: managing owners and managing non-owners, that is, bureaucratic managers. The controlled group is also divided into two subgroups: the highest - the "working aristocracy" and the lowest - low-skilled workers. Between these two social groups lies an intermediate "new middle class".

American sociologist B. Barber stratifies society according to six indicators:

1) the prestige of the profession, power and might;

2) income or wealth;

3) education or knowledge;

4) religious or ritual purity;

5) the situation of relatives;

6) ethnicity.

The French sociologist A. Touraine believes that in modern society social differentiation is carried out not in relation to property, prestige, power, ethnicity, but in relation to access to information. The dominant position is occupied by people who have access to the greatest amount of information.

In American society, W. Warner singled out three classes (upper, middle and lower), each of which consists of two layers.

Upper upper class. The "pass" to this layer is the inherited wealth and social fame of the family; as a rule, these are old settlers whose fortunes have increased over several generations. They are very rich, but they don't flaunt their wealth. The social position of representatives of this elite stratum is so secure that they can deviate from accepted norms without fear of losing their status.

lower upper class . These are professionals in their field, receiving extremely high income. They earned, not inherited their position. These are active people large quantity material symbols emphasizing their status: the most big houses in the best areas, the most expensive cars, swimming pools, etc.

upper middle class . These are people for whom the main thing is a career. High professional, scientific training or business management experience can become the basis of a career. Representatives of this class are very demanding about the education of their children, they are characterized by somewhat exposed consumption. A house in a prestigious area for them is the main sign of their success and their prosperity.

lower middle class . Typical Americans who are an example of respectability, conscientious attitude to work, fidelity to cultural norms and standards. Members of this class also great importance give prestige to their home.

Upper lower class . people leading ordinary life, filled with events that repeat from day to day. Representatives of this class live in non-prestigious areas of the city, in small houses or apartments. This class includes builders, auxiliary workers and others whose labor is devoid of creativity. They are only required to have a secondary education and some skills; they usually work by hand.

lower lower class . People who are in extreme distress, having problems with the law. These include, in particular, immigrants of non-European origin. The lower class person rejects the norms of the middle classes and tries to live for today, spending most of his income on food and shopping on credit.

The experience of using the Warner stratification model has shown that in the presented form it in most cases does not correspond to the countries of Eastern Europe, Russia and Ukraine, where in the course of historical processes a different social structure is emerging.

The social structure of Ukrainian society, based on the sociological research of N. Rimashevskaya, in general view can be represented like this.

one." All-Ukrainian elite groups", which unite in their hands the property in the amount equivalent to the largest Western countries, and also own the means of power influence at the national level.

2. " Regional and corporate elites”, which have a significant Ukrainian position and influence at the level of regions and entire industries or sectors of the economy.

3. The Ukrainian "upper middle class", which owns property and incomes that provide Western standards of consumption as well. Representatives of this stratum strive to improve their social status, focus on the established practice and ethical standards of economic relations.

4. The Ukrainian "dynamic middle class", which owns incomes that ensure the satisfaction of average Ukrainian and higher standards of consumption, and is also characterized by a relatively high potential adaptability, significant social aspirations and motivations, and an orientation towards legal ways of its manifestation.

5. "Outsiders", which are characterized by low adaptation and social activity, low incomes and orientation towards legal ways of obtaining it.

6. "Marginals", which are characterized by low adaptation, as well as asocial and antisocial attitudes in their socio-economic activities.

7. "Criminal society", which is characterized by high social activity and adaptability, but at the same time fully consciously and rationally opposes the legal norms of economic activity.

So, social stratification is a reflection of vertical inequality in society. Society organizes and reproduces inequality on several grounds: in terms of welfare, wealth and income, prestige of status groups, possession political power, education, etc. It can be argued that all types of hierarchy are significant for society, since they allow both regulating the reproduction of social ties and directing personal aspirations and ambitions of people to acquire statuses that are significant for society.

It is necessary to distinguish between two concepts - ranging and stratification . Ranking has two aspects - objective and subjective. When we talk about the objective side of ranking, we mean visible, visible to the eye differences between people. Subjective ranking implies our tendency to compare people, somehow evaluate them. Any action of this kind is related to ranking. Ranking ascribes to phenomena and individuals a certain value, a price, and thanks to this it builds them into a meaningful system.

Ranking reaches its maximum in a society where individuals have to openly compete with each other. For example, the market objectively compares not only goods, but also people, primarily on the basis of their individual abilities.

The result of the ranking is a ranking system. Rank indicates the relative position of an individual or group within a ranking system. Any group - large or small - can be considered as a single ranking system.

The American sociologist E. Braudel proposes to distinguish, using the ranking criterion, individual and group stratification. If individuals are ranked in ranks regardless of their group affiliation, then we get individual stratification. If the set of different groups is ordered in a certain way, then we can get group stratification.

When a scientist takes into account only the objective side of ranking, he uses the concept of stratification. Thus, stratification is an objective aspect or result of ranking. Stratification indicates the order of ranking, the relative position of the ranks, their distribution within the ranking system.

Individual stratification is characterized by the following features:

1. The order of ranks is based on one criterion. For example, a football player should be judged by his game on the field, but not by wealth or religious beliefs, a scientist by the number of publications, a teacher by his success with students.

1. Ranking can also take into account the economic context: an excellent football player and an outstanding scientist should receive high salaries.

2. Unlike group stratification, individual stratification does not exist permanently. It works for a short time.

3. Individual stratification is based on personal achievement. But apart from personal qualities, individuals are ranked and valued according to the reputation of their family or the group to which they belong, say, a wealthy family or scientists.

In group stratification, it is not individual individuals that are evaluated and ranked, but entire groups, for example, a group of slaves is valued low, and the noble class is highly valued.

The English sociologist E. Giddens distinguishes four historical types of stratification: slavery, castes, estates, classes.

In this way, main idea theories of stratification - the eternal inequality of individuals and groups in society, which cannot be overcome, since inequality is an objective feature of society, the source of its development (in contrast to the Marxist approach, which assumed the social homogeneity of society in the future).

Modern theories of social stratification, which put forward certain criteria for the division of society into social strata (groups), serve methodological basis for the formation of the theory of social mobility.

Social stratification is the division of society into groups depending on the profession, income, access to power. She, like many others social phenomena has several varieties. Let us consider in more detail each of the types of social stratification.

Two kinds of social stratification

There are various classifications, but the most popular is the division of stratification into political and professional. Economic stratification can also be added here.

Political stratification

This type of stratification of society divides people into those who participate in political life, can influence it, and those who are deprived of such an opportunity or are limited.

Features of political stratification

• exists in all countries;
• constantly changing and developing (since social groups often change their position, acquire or, conversely, lose the ability to influence politics).

groups of people

The political stratification of society is expressed in the existence next layers :

TOP 4 articleswho read along with this

• political leaders;
• elite (Party leaders, representatives of higher authorities, top military leadership);
• state bureaucracy;
• population of the country.

Occupational stratification

This is the differentiation (separation) of professional groups of people into layers. Most often, the main feature that allows them to be distinguished is the level of qualification of workers.

The existence of this type of stratification is explained by the fact that a person's profession, his main activity in society, require him to form certain skills, acquire knowledge. So there is a special social group of people with similar social roles, style of behavior, psychological characteristics.

The difference between occupational groups and features business qualities people can be very different. For example, the work of an accountant does not involve constant interaction and live communication with other people, while the work of a journalist requires regular contact with other people.

In other words, involvement in one business makes people similar to each other, which allows them to be combined into a large group.

Let's single out groups of people , using the criteria of professional stratification:

• elite (Representatives of the authorities and other people with the largest incomes);
• upper layer (Large businessmen, owners of large enterprises);
• middle layer (Small entrepreneurs, skilled workers, officers);
• main or base layer (Specialists, their assistants, workers);
• bottom layer (Unskilled workers, unemployed).

Economic stratification

It is based on differences in income, standard of living, economic status of people. That is, the division of people into groups occurs depending on which of the rungs of the income ladder they are:

• upper (Rich people with the largest incomes);
• average (Prosperous groups of the population);
• lower (Poor).

This stratification can be applied different ways: among all people receiving any income, among economically active people producing goods and providing services, among classes.

Progressive and regressive stratification

These types of stratification are also used when characterizing social structure. Their essence lies in the fact that with the development of society, the social composition changes, new groups of the population appear, and some former layers either disappear or adapt to new conditions. So, during the period of the beginning of industrialization and modernization in Russia (late 19th-early 20th centuries), manufacturers, workers, intellectuals, scientists become the progressive part of the population, while the conservative part of the population - nobles, landowners - turn out to be a regressive part and disappear as a class. Evaluation of the report

Average rating: 3.9. Total ratings received: 212.

Ministry of Education of the Republic of Belarus

educational institution

"BELARUSIAN STATE UNIVERSITY

INFORMATION SCIENCE AND RADIO ELECTRONICS»

Department of Humanities

Test

in sociology

on the topic: "SOCIAL STRATIFICATION"

Completed by: student gr.802402 Boyko E.N.

Option 19

The concept of social stratification. Sociological theories of social stratification.

Sources and factors of social stratification.

Historical types of social stratification. The role and importance of the middle class in modern society.

1. The concept of social stratification. Sociological theories of social stratification

The very term "social stratification" was borrowed from geology, where it means the successive change of rock layers different ages. But the first ideas about social stratification are found in Plato (distinguishes three classes: philosophers, guards, farmers and artisans) and Aristotle (also three classes: "very wealthy", "extremely poor", "middle class"). 1 The ideas of the theory of social stratification finally took shape at the end of the 18th century. thanks to the emergence of the method of sociological analysis.

Consider the various definitions of the concept of "social stratification" and highlight the characteristic features.

Social stratification:

it is social differentiation and structuring of inequality between different social strata and population groups based on various criteria (social prestige, self-identification, profession, education, level and source of income, etc.); 2

these are hierarchically organized structures of social inequality that exist in any society; 3

these are social differences that become stratification when people are hierarchically located in some dimension of inequality; 4

a set of vertically arranged social strata: poor-rich. 5

Thus, the essential features of social stratification are the concepts of "social inequality", "hierarchy", "system organization", "vertical structure", "layer, stratum".

The basis of stratification in sociology is inequality, i.e. uneven distribution of rights and privileges, responsibilities and duties, power and influence.

Inequality and poverty are concepts closely related to social stratification. Inequality characterizes the unequal distribution of society's scarce resources—income, power, education, and prestige—between different strata or strata of the population. The main measure of inequality is the number of liquid values. This function is usually performed by money (in primitive societies, inequality was expressed in the number of small and large cattle, shells, etc.).

Poverty is not only a minimum income, but a special way and style of life, norms of behavior, stereotypes of perception and psychology that are passed down from generation to generation. So sociologists talk about poverty as a special subculture.

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 always owns for the most part national wealth, in other words, receives the highest incomes

K. Marx and M. Weber were the first to try to explain the nature of social stratification.

The first saw the cause of social stratification in the separation of those who own and manage the means of production and those who sell their labor. These two classes (the bourgeoisie and the proletariat) have different interests and oppose each other, the antagonistic relations between them are built on exploitation. The basis for distinguishing classes is the economic system (the nature and mode of production). With such a bipolar approach, there is no place for the middle class. Interestingly, the founder of the class approach, K. Marx, did not give a clear definition of the concept of "class". The first definition of class in Marxist sociology was given by VI Lenin. Subsequently, this theory had a huge impact on the study of the social structure of Soviet society: first the presence of a system of two opposing classes, in which there was no place for the middle class with its function of coordinating interests, and then the "destruction" of the class of exploiters and the "striving for universal equality" and how follows from the definition of stratification, a classless society. However, in reality, equality was formal, and in Soviet society there were various social groups (nomenklatura, workers, intelligentsia).

M. Weber proposed a multidimensional approach, highlighting three dimensions to characterize classes: class (economic status), status (prestige) and party (power). It is these interrelated (through income, profession, education, etc.) factors that, according to Weber, underlie the stratification of society. Unlike K. Marx, for M. Weber class is only an indicator of economic stratification, it appears only where market relations arise. For Marx, the concept of class is historically universal.

Nevertheless, in modern sociology, the question of the existence and significance of social inequality, and, hence, social stratification, occupies a central place. There are two main points of view: conservative and radical. Theories based on the conservative tradition ("inequality is a tool for solving the main problems of society") are called functionalist. 6 Radical theories view social inequality as a mechanism of exploitation. The most developed is the theory of conflict. 7

The functionalist theory of stratification was formulated in 1945 by K. Davis and W. Moore. Stratification exists because of its universality and necessity; society cannot do without stratification. Social order and integration require a certain degree of stratification. The stratification system makes it possible to fill in all the statuses that form the social structure, it develops incentives for the individual to fulfill the duties associated with their position. The distribution of material wealth, power functions and social prestige (inequality) depends on the functional significance of the position (status) of the individual. In any society there are positions that require specific abilities and training. Society must have certain benefits that are used as incentives for people to take positions and fulfill their respective roles. As well as certain ways of uneven distribution of these benefits, depending on the positions held. Functionally important positions should be rewarded accordingly. Inequality plays the role of an emotional stimulus. Benefits are built into the social system, so stratification is a structural feature of all societies. Universal equality would deprive people of the incentive to advance, the desire to make every effort to fulfill their duties. If incentives are not enough and statuses are not filled, the society breaks up. This theory has a number of shortcomings (does not take into account the influence of culture, traditions, family, etc.), but is one of the most developed.

The theory of conflict is based on the ideas of K. Marx. The stratification of society exists because it is beneficial to individuals or groups that have power over other groups. However, conflict is a common feature of human life and is not limited to economic relations. R. Dahrendorf 8 believed that group conflict is an inevitable aspect of society. R. Collins, within the framework of his concept, proceeded from the belief that all people are characterized by conflict due to the antagonism of their interests. 9 The concept is based on three basic principles: 1) people live in subjective worlds constructed by them; 2) people can have the power to influence or control the subjective experience of an individual; 3) people often try to control the individual who opposes them.

The process and result of social stratification was also considered within the framework of the following theories:

distributive theory of classes (J. Mellier, F. Voltaire, J.-J. Rousseau, D. Diderot, etc.);

the theory of production classes (R. Cantillon, J. Necker, A. Turgot);

theories of utopian socialists (A. Saint-Simon, C. Fourier, L. Blanc, etc.);

class theory based on social ranks (E. Tord, R. Worms and others);

racial theory (L. Gumplovich);

multicriteria class theory (G. Schmoller);

the theory of historical layers by W. Sombart;

organizational theory (A. Bogdanov, V. Shulyatikov);

multidimensional stratification model of A.I. Stronin;

One of the creators of the modern theory of stratification is P.A.Sorokin. He introduces the concept of "social space" as the totality of all social statuses. this society filled with social connections and relationships. The way of organizing this space is stratification. Social space is three-dimensional: each of its dimensions corresponds to one of the three main forms (criteria) of stratification. Social space is described by three axes: economic, political and professional status. Accordingly, the position of an individual or group is described in this space using three coordinates. A set of individuals with similar social coordinates form a stratum. The basis of stratification is the uneven distribution of rights and privileges, responsibilities and obligations, power and influence.

T.I. Zaslavskaya made a great contribution to the solution of practical and theoretical problems of the stratification of Russian society. 10 In her opinion, the social structure of society is the people themselves, organized into various kinds of groups (layers, strata) and performing in the system of economic relations all those social roles that the economy gives rise to, which it requires. It is these people and their groups that carry out a certain social policy, organize the development of the country, and make decisions. Thus, in turn, the social and economic status of these groups, their interests, the nature of their activity and their relationship with each other influence the development of the economy.

2.Sources and factors of social stratification

What "orients" large social groups? It turns out that there is an unequal assessment by society of the meaning and role of each status or group. A plumber or a janitor is valued below a lawyer and a minister. Consequently, high statuses and people occupying them are better rewarded, they have more power, the prestige of their occupation is higher, and the level of education should also be higher. We get four main dimensions of stratification - income, power, education, prestige. These four dimensions exhaust the range of social benefits to which people aspire. More precisely, not the benefits themselves (there may just be many of them), but the channels of access to them. A home abroad, a luxury car, a yacht, a vacation in the Canary Islands, etc. - social goods that are always in short supply (i.e. highly respected and inaccessible to the majority) and are acquired through access to money and power, which, in turn, are achieved through high education and personal qualities.

Thus, the social structure arises in connection with the social division of labor, and social stratification arises in connection with the social distribution of the results of labor, i.e., social benefits.

The distribution is always unequal. So there is an arrangement of social strata according to the criterion of unequal access to power, wealth, education and prestige.

Imagine a social space in which vertical and horizontal distances are not equal. P. Sorokin, 11 the man who was the first in the world to give a complete theoretical explanation of the phenomenon, and who confirmed his theory with the help of a huge empirical material stretching throughout human history, thought this way or approximately this way. Points in space are social statuses. The distance between the turner and the miller is one, it is horizontal, and the distance between the worker and the master is different, it is vertical. The master is the boss, the worker is the subordinate. They have different social ranks. Although the case can be presented in such a way that the master and worker will be located at an equal distance from each other. This will happen if we consider both of them not as a boss and a subordinate, but only as workers performing different labor functions. But then we will move from the vertical to the horizontal plane.

The inequality of distances between statuses is the main property of stratification. She has four measuring rulers, or coordinate axes. All of them are located vertically and next to each other:

Education,

Prestige.

Income is measured in rubles or dollars that an individual (individual income) or family (family income) receives during a certain period of time, say, one month or a year.

Education is measured by the number of years of study in a public or private school or university.

Power is not measured by the number of people who are affected by the decision you make (power is the ability to impose your will or decisions on other people, regardless of their desire). The decisions of the President of Russia apply to 147 million people, and the decisions of the foreman - to 7-10 people.

Three scales of stratification - income, education and power - have completely objective units of measurement: dollars, years, people. Prestige is outside this range, as it is a subjective indicator. Prestige - respect for status, prevailing in public opinion.

Membership in a stratum is measured by subjective and objective indicators:

subjective indicator - a sense of belonging to this group, identification with it;

objective indicators - income, power, education, prestige.

Thus, a large fortune, high education, great power and high professional prestige are the necessary conditions for a person to be classified as the highest stratum of society.

3. Historical types of social stratification. The role and importance of the middle class in modern society.

The assigned status characterizes a rigidly fixed system of stratification, that is, a closed society in which the transition from one stratum to another is practically prohibited. Such systems include slavery, caste and estate systems. The achieved status characterizes a mobile system of stratification, or an open society, where people are allowed to move freely up and down the social ladder. Such a system includes classes (capitalist society). These are the historical types of stratification.

Stratification, that is, inequality in income, power, prestige and education, arose along with the birth of human society. In its embryonic form, it was already found in a simple (primitive) society. With the advent of the early state - the eastern despotism - stratification becomes tougher, and as European society develops, mores are liberalized, stratification softens. The class system is freer than caste and slavery, and the class system that replaced the class system became even more liberal.

Slavery is historically the first system of social stratification. Slavery arose in ancient times in Egypt, Babylon, China, Greece, Rome and has survived in a number of regions almost to the present day. It has existed in the United States since the 19th century. Slavery - economic, social and legal form enslavement of people, bordering on complete lack of rights and an extreme degree of inequality. It has evolved historically. The primitive form, or patriarchal slavery, and the developed form, or classical slavery, differ substantially. In the first case, the slave had all the rights of the youngest member of the family: he lived in the same house with the owners, participated in public life, married the free, inherited the property of the owner. It was forbidden to kill him. At the mature stage, the slave was finally enslaved: he lived in a separate room, did not participate in anything, did not inherit anything, did not marry and had no family. He was allowed to be killed. He did not own property, but he himself was considered the property of the owner (<говорящим орудием>).

Like slavery, the caste system characterizes society and rigid stratification. It is not as ancient as the slave system, closed and less common. If almost all countries went through slavery, of course, to varying degrees, then castes were found only in India and partly in Africa. India is a classic example of a caste society. It arose on the ruins of the slave system in the first centuries of the new era.

A caste is a social group (stratum) in which a person owes membership solely to birth. He cannot move from one caste to another during his lifetime. To do this, he needs to be born again. The caste position of a person is fixed by the Hindu religion (now it is clear why castes are not widespread). According to its canons, people live more than one life. The previous life of a person determines the nature of his new birth and the caste into which he falls in this case - the lowest or vice versa.

In total, there are 4 main castes in India: Brahmins (priests), Kshatriyas (warriors), Vaishyas (merchants), Shudras (workers and peasants) - and about 5 thousand minor castes and podcasts. The untouchables (outcasts) are especially worthy - they are not included in any caste and occupy the lowest position. In the course of industrialization, castes are replaced by classes. The Indian city is becoming more and more class-based, while the village, in which 7/10 of the population lives, remains caste-based.

Estates are a form of stratification that precedes classes. In the feudal societies that existed in Europe from the 4th to the 14th centuries, people were divided into estates.

An estate is a social group that has rights and obligations enshrined in custom or legal law and inherited. The estate system, which includes several strata, is characterized by a hierarchy, expressed in the inequality of their position and privileges. A classic example of class organization was feudal Europe, where at the turn of the 14th-15th centuries society was divided into upper classes (nobility and clergy) and an unprivileged third estate (artisans, merchants, peasants). And in X - XIII centuries There were three main estates: the clergy, the nobility and the peasantry. In Russia, from the second half of the 18th century, a class division into nobility, clergy, merchants, peasantry and philistinism (middle urban strata) was established. Estates were based on landed property.

The rights and obligations of each estate were enshrined in legal law and consecrated by religious doctrine. Membership in the estate was determined by inheritance. Social barriers between the estates were quite rigid, so social mobility existed not so much between as within the estates. Each estate included many layers, ranks, levels, professions, ranks. So, only nobles could engage in public service. The aristocracy was considered a military estate (chivalry).

The higher in the social hierarchy an estate stood, the higher was its status. In contrast to castes, inter-class marriages were completely allowed, and allowed individual mobility. A simple person could become a knight by purchasing a special permit from the ruler. Merchants acquired titles of nobility for money. As a relic, this practice has partially survived in modern England.

Belonging to a social stratum in slave-owning, caste and estate-feudal societies was officially fixed - by legal or religious norms. In a class society, the situation is different: no legal documents regulate the place of the individual in the social structure. Every person is free to move, with ability, education or income, from one class to another.

Today, sociologists offer different typologies of classes. One has seven, the other has six, the third has five, and so on. social strata. The first typology of US classes was proposed in the 1940s by the American sociologist Lloyd Warner. It included six classes. Today it has been replenished with one more layer and in its final form it represents a seven-point scale.

Upper-upper class includes<аристократов по крови>who emigrated to America 200 years ago and accumulated untold wealth over many generations. They are distinguished by a special way of life, high society manners, impeccable taste and behavior.

The lower-upper class consists mainly of<новых богатых>who have not yet managed to create powerful tribal clans that have seized the highest positions in industry, business, and politics. Typical representatives are a professional basketball player or a pop star who receive tens of millions, but in the family who have no<аристократов по крови>.

The upper-middle class consists of the petty bourgeoisie and highly paid professionals: big lawyers, famous doctors, actors or TV commentators. Their lifestyle is approaching high society, but they still cannot afford a fashionable villa in the most expensive resorts in the world or a rare collection of art rarities.

The middle-middle class represents the most massive stratum of a developed industrial society. It includes all well-paid employees, medium-paid professionals, in a word, people of intelligent professions, including teachers, teachers, middle managers. It is the backbone of the information society and the service sector.

The lower-middle class was made up of lower employees and skilled workers, who, by the nature and content of their work, gravitate rather not to physical, but to mental labor. A distinctive feature is a decent way of life.

The upper-lower class includes medium and low-skilled workers employed in mass production in local factories, living in relative prosperity, but in behavior significantly different from the upper and middle class. Distinctive features: low education (usually complete and incomplete secondary, secondary specialized), passive leisure (watching TV, playing cards, etc.), primitive entertainment, often excessive use of alcohol and non-literary vocabulary.

The lower-lower class are the inhabitants of basements, attics, slums and other unsuitable places for habitation. They do not have any or have only a primary education, most of all they are interrupted by odd jobs or begging, they constantly feel an inferiority complex due to hopeless poverty and constant humiliation. They are usually called<социальным дном>, or an underclass. Most often, their ranks are recruited from chronic alcoholics, former prisoners, homeless people, etc.

Term<верхний-высший класс>means the upper layer of the upper class. In all two-part words, the first word denotes a stratum or layer, and the second - the class to which this layer belongs.<Верхний-низший класс>sometimes they call it what it is, and sometimes it refers to the working class. In sociology, the criterion for attributing a person to one or another layer is not only income, but also the amount of power, the level of education and the prestige of the occupation, which presuppose a specific lifestyle and style of behavior. You can get a lot, but all the money is ineptly spent or spent on drink. Not only the arrival of money is important, but also their expenditure, and this is already a way of life.

The working class in modern post-industrial society includes two layers: lower-middle and upper-lower. All knowledge workers, no matter how little they get, are never enrolled in the lower class.

The middle class (with its layers) is always distinguished from the working class. But the working class is also distinguished from the lower class, which may include the unemployed, the unemployed, the homeless, the poor, and so on. As a rule, highly skilled workers are included not in the working class, but in the middle, but in its lowest stratum, which is filled mainly by low-skilled mental workers - employees.

The middle class is a unique phenomenon in world history. Let's put it this way: it has not been throughout the history of mankind. It appeared only in the 20th century. In society, it performs a specific function. The middle class is the stabilizer of society. The larger it is, the less likely it is that society will be shaken by revolutions, ethnic conflicts, social cataclysms. The middle class separates two opposite poles, rich and poor, and does not allow them to collide. The thinner the middle class, the closer the polar points of stratification are to each other, the more likely they are to collide. And vice versa.

The middle class is the broadest consumer market for small and medium businesses. The more numerous this class, the more confidently the small business stands on its feet. As a rule, the middle class includes those who have economic independence, i.e. own an enterprise, firm, office, private practice, their work, scientists, priests, doctors, lawyers, middle managers, petty bourgeoisie - the social "backbone" of society.

What is the middle class? It follows from the term itself that it belongs to the middle position in society, but its other characteristics are important, primarily qualitative ones. It should be noted that the middle class itself is internally heterogeneous, it distinguishes such layers as the upper middle class (it includes managers, lawyers, doctors, representatives of medium-sized businesses with high prestige and high income), the middle middle class (owners of small businesses , farmers), the lower middle class (office staff, teachers, nurses, salesmen). The main thing is that the numerous strata that make up the middle class and are characterized by enough high level life, have a very strong, and sometimes decisive influence on the adoption of certain economic and political decisions, in general, on the policy of the ruling elite, which cannot but listen to the "voice" of the majority. The middle class largely, if not completely, forms the ideology of Western society, its morality, and typical way of life. It should be noted that in relation to the middle class, a complex criterion is applied: its involvement in power structures and influence on them, income, prestige of the profession, level of education. It is important to emphasize the last term in this multivariate criterion. Due to the high level of education of numerous representatives of the middle class of modern Western society, its inclusion in the power structures of various levels, high incomes and the prestige of the profession are ensured.