Theories of Inequality
In briefly evaluating the classical and modern explanations of social inequality, it is essential that we step outside the realm of our own lives, class position, and discard any assumptions we might have about the nature of inequality. This process of critical pedagogy allows us to view our world, not from our perspective, but from a wider, more critical analysis of inequality's nature. Also, it should be considered within this wider perspective that all theories of inequality have a class perspective, where the theorist, based on the position their theory takes, is making claims from (or for) a particular class (whether they want to or not). With this in mind, it seems that most of these theories come from fairly elite class perspectives and, in turn, tend to be more pessimistic about bringing change to the inequalities they are evaluating. Of the classical (elite) explanations of inequality, Max Weber's seemed to be most accepted within the domain of sociology and other social sciences dealing with modes of inequality. Weber, who believes that we are living within a sort of "iron cage" which cannot allow us to look beyond the rules and regulations of our capitalist system, emphasizes the importance of power relationsh
By reproducing itself as it does, it generally maintains control to be held by those who have made, and have been born into money-while those without struggle to simply survive, let alone profit. I believe most of the modern explanations of inequality, at most, help build upon Weber's general theories, and at least, reflect the same elitist pessimism that Weber also holds. Within this structure, Weber describes there being three dimensions of inequality: class (which correlates with the economy), status (which correlates with the social aspects of society), and party (which correlates with the political aspects of society). So, according to these elite theories, the problem of inequality is an individual problem. The working class, on the other hand, are trading their labor for capital-making them basically products for capitalists to exploit. If the theory requires that society must measure class and power positions in terms of importance, then who will be the measurers? Always, it seems, the power elite will be the ones who really have the control of measuring importance-and doesn't it seem likely, if not natural, that they would perceive themselves as being the most important people within the whole of society? Surely the underpaid educator would disagree with societies ability to rate importance through income, believing that they are among the most important, since education, it can be argued, is the most important aspect in society (especially for reproducing the system of inequality). Similarly, the functionalist theory of stratification "views societies as social systems that have certain basic problems to solve or functions that have to be performed if the society is to survive" (243). This can be illustrated today by all of the people pouring their income into the stock market, which ultimately gives the capitalists much greater proportions of wealth than the working class receives. So the reason for inequality, for functionalists, is because our system must reward (with significantly higher incomes) those individuals who are motivated enough to yield the stresses of such functionally important positions. Therefore, wealth and material gains become more important than moral and social improvements, and we begin to value our world in terms of efficiency, profitability, and material worth. Also, these theories assume that we are all equal in opportunity, when, in fact, there is no such thing as equality in a system which needs to reproduce itself in every aspect of the social realm. These theories, especially the functionalist theory, are based on solely subjective measurement schemes, and are in no way objective (nor does it seem that these aspects can be objectively measured). The core attributes of the economic system are alienation and the bureaucracy, which create a dehumanizing effect on the characters within the system. In this system, Marx believes that these positions of class are maintained by the very structure of the capitalist system.
Common topics in this essay:
Max Weber's,
Karl Marx,
,
theories inequality,
marx believed,
reproduce aspect,
importance lower income,
income market,
functionalist theory,
importance lower,
power elite,
inequality class,
explanations inequality,
power positions,
|
Acceptance Essays
