Page 270 - DSOC202_SOCIAL_STRATIFICATION_ENGLISH

Unit 13: Changing Dimensions of Social Stratification

to others, of carrying arms, the right to pursue certain artistic practices, to play certain musical Notes
instruments, etc. In the caste system, the lower castes were denied, for example, access to education,
amenities available exclusively for upper or clean castes, marriage procession in the neighbourhoods
of the upper castes, etc. There is a long list of denials to the lower castes, including restrictions on
observance of rituals, occupations, movements, migration and mobility.
Within a status circle there is the monopolization of potential bridegrooms, and also of daughters,
in the context of a marriage circle. Certain goods become objects for monopolization by status
groups. Serfs or bondsmen, and special trades, were quite common in feudalism and caste system.
Feudal lords and priests or warriors as distinct status groups were entitled to own and manage
certain services and goods which were denied to others.
In other words, status groups are the specific bearers of all conventions. All “stylization” of life
either originates in status groups or is at least conserved by them. The most privileged strata
reveal certain typical traits. Work just for money, or an activity which is devoid of excellence or
peculiarity, is considered antithetical to honorific preference or style of life.
Power
Power is omnipresent. It is in everyday life, in the micro-world of the individual, in the school and
at the workplace. Power is relational, some have very less power, and others have near-absolute
power. Means of power range from physical force to gentle cajoling. At the macro level, there are
institutions of power and authority, such as the state or government.
Power is in society, and society is reflected in the structure of power and authority. Power is not
a new concern in sociology. Two approaches, one led by Max Weber and other by Vilfredo Pareto,
provide the basic categories for the sociological analysis of power.
The Weberian Approach
According to Weber, “power is the probability that one actor within a social relationship will be
in a position to carry out his own will despite resistance, regardless of the basis on which this
probability rests”. Command and compliance are key terms in Weber’s analysis of power. The
concept of power is highly comprehensive. “All conceivable qualities of a person and all conceivable
combinations of circumstances may put him in a position to impose his will in a given situation.”
Imperative control operates in exercise of a command given by an authority to a person for
compliance. Authority is legitimized, but not all power is so.
The main point in Weber’s analysis is that power can exist even against resistance. If there is
resistance, then it is overcome. Power is distinct from “leadership”. The latter emanates from a
group/collectivity based on some criteria to lead people in a particular way and direction. Power
rests on means of enforcement that lie only in the imagination and also on the nature of resistance.
Power is closely related to social control, as power involves societal coercion against recalcitrant
individuals or groups. However, the two have different connotations. Social control is a negative
category. It refers to social mechanisms that are designed to prevent deviant or disruptive conduct.
Power has more positive functions. Power refers to carrying out the will of an individual or a
group. But then social control tries to keep individuals and groups within its bounds. The category
of power, on the contrary, suggests conflict. The will to power of one individual can clash with
that of another, and the same is true of groups, institutions or entire societies. Thus, all human
societies have both the phenomena, namely, power and social control. All societies have struggles
over power.
In fact, Weber draws a clear distinction between “power” and “domination”. Power is a general
phenomenon, whereas domination is a more specific aspect. As we have discussed earlier, power
comprises the chance that an actor’s will can be imposed on other participants in a social
relationship, even against their resistance. Power is measured simply by the chance that an individual

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 265