Page 267 - DSOC202_SOCIAL_STRATIFICATION_ENGLISH

Social Stratification

Notes The capitalist class has control over all the three resources. The working class has control over
none of them. In between the two are contradictory class locations, in which Wright includes white-
collar and professional employees. These people are neither capitalists nor manual workers, but
share some common features with both of them.
Another approach is given by Frank Parkin, who says that property is only one form of social
closure. Parkin defines social closure as any process by which groups try to maintain exclusive
control over resources, limiting access to them. Besides property or wealth, status differences such
as ethnic origin, language or religion may also be used to create social closure. Two types of
process are involved in social closure : exclusion, and usurpation. The first refers to preventing
others from having access to valued resources. The second refers to the efforts made by the less
privileged to acquire resources from the privileged ones. The lower and backward castes are an
appropriate example of usurpation. There is dual closure, that is, usurpation on one hand by a
group of people and denial by the same group to other social groups from sharing the benefits.
Normally, all societies are divided into the upper, the middle and the working (lower) classes,
based on wealth, income and the access to societal resources. But none of these classes are monolith
and homogeneous entities. They are internally differentiated, e.g., upper middle, lower middle
classes, upper working class, lower working class, etc. Class is also a matter of self-perception.
According to a study in Britain, people considered themselves as upper middle, middle, upper
working, working, and poor. In America, generally, people perceive their class subjectively, whereas
their status is based on objective criteria such as property, wealth, occupation, income, etc.
Marx, Weber and the Study of Class in India
Class in India has existed along with caste and power. Change in the caste system is generally
seen as an indication of the emergence of class-based relations. Migration, mobility, modern
occupations, education, etc., are indicators of emerging class structure. A class analysis of Indian
society has been advocated by some scholars who argue that class relations are as old as caste
relations. Class transformation has been a viable fact in the form of new kingdoms, settled
agriculture, trade, cities, banking and guild organizations. However, some scholars define class as
an abstract category in terms of certain devices. Based on such an approach, classes are constructed
as upper, middle and lower strata of society.
Mode of production and class contradictions are essential features of the Marxist approach to
class, class conflict and class consciousness.. The forces of production and production relations
could be seen even in caste, kinship, family, marriage and even in rituals. Emergence of a new
bourgeoisie, polarization of peasantry and pauperization of the working class have been reported
in Indian society. Today, the main classes are : agrarian, industrial, business, mercantile, and
professional. Contradictions could be seen due to persistence of the old classes and at the same
time emergence of the new classes. Generally, industrial, business and professional classes
characterize urban India. Landowners, tenants, sharecroppers and agriculture labourers “are there
in rural India.
These classifications have ideological overtones. Simple reference to landowners, moneylenders
and landowners as classes does not imply class antagonism. But, the use of terms such as
bourgeoisie, gentlemen farmers, rich peasants, landless peasants, agricultural labourers, etc., refers
to class interaction, hegemony and conflict as the characteristic features of class structure.
Caste overshadows class quite often, because it continues as a means of identity and mobilization.
Both caste and class are real. But, there is no correspondence as it used to be in the past between
the two systems. Middle castes are not middle classes necessarily. Middle classes could be lower
castes. Middle and lower classes may be from amongst the upper castes. Middle castes could be
both middle and upper classes. Such permutations and combinations characterize today’s Indian
society. India’s middle classes are disproportionate to the forces of production and to the sizes of

262 LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY