Social Stratification & Mobility — Module 1
1) Concept of Equality
Equality means institutional arrangements that guarantee equal basic respect and fair opportunities to develop capabilities. It differs from sameness: societies pursue equality of status and equality of opportunity rather than identical outcomes.
Thinkers
T. H. Marshall linked equality to the historical expansion of citizenship—civil, political, and social rights—transforming legal equality into welfare-based substantive equality.
John Rawls framed equality as justice as fairness: citizens behind a “veil of ignorance” would choose equal liberties and the difference principle—inequalities are just only if they benefit the least advantaged.
Amartya Sen emphasized equality of capabilities—real freedoms to achieve valued lives. Resources must translate into substantive freedoms like education, health, and mobility.
Karl Marx critiqued formal equality: in capitalism, legal equality hides class exploitation. Real equality requires changing property ownership.
Norm + Institutions
Citizenship rights
(civil → political → social)
Justice as fairness,
difference principle
Capabilities & freedoms
Real vs formal equality
2) Concept of Inequality
Inequality is a structured pattern of unequal access to resources, power, and prestige, reproduced across generations.
Thinkers
Karl Marx saw inequality as arising from class ownership and exploitation of labor; ideology conceals class domination.
Max Weber proposed multidimensional inequality: class (economic), status (honor), and party (power), shaping life chances.
Pierre Bourdieu showed how inequality reproduces through economic, cultural, and social capital. Schools valorize elite culture as merit—“symbolic violence.”
Structured disparities
Class & exploitation
Class / Status / Party
Capitals & reproduction
| Dimension | Marx | Weber | Bourdieu |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cause | Ownership & exploitation | Market & social honor | Unequal capitals |
| Mechanism | Property & ideology | Status closure | Education & habitus |
| Outcome | Class conflict | Stratified life chances | Intergenerational privilege |
3) Hierarchy
Hierarchy is an ordered ranking of persons or groups by power, status, or purity. It organizes cooperation yet legitimizes domination.
Thinkers
Louis Dumont interpreted caste as a religiously sanctioned hierarchy of purity and pollution. Society is holistic, valuing difference over equality.
Talcott Parsons viewed hierarchy as functional: societies rank roles to motivate talent. Weber noted status groups preserve honor via closure. Béteille showed caste and class hierarchies coexist in India.
Ordered ranking
Dumont: purity/pollution
Weber/Marx: market/ownership
Walby: patriarchy
Ascriptive boundaries
4) Exclusion
Social exclusion is the institutional denial of access, participation, and recognition.
Thinkers
B. R. Ambedkar described caste as graded inequality—exclusion through religious sanction and endogamy. Remedy: constitutional rights and social democracy.
Amartya Sen differentiated active (discriminatory) and passive (market neglect) exclusion, both reducing capabilities.
Pierre Bourdieu analyzed symbolic exclusion via cultural capital. Frank Parkin emphasized social closure; Iris Young listed five faces of oppression.
| Form | Mechanism | Example (India) | Thinker |
|---|---|---|---|
| Economic | Hiring bias | Informal sector traps | Sen, Parkin |
| Social | Endogamy, stigma | Caste segregation | Ambedkar |
| Political | Under-representation | Tribal councils | Young |
| Cultural | Language barriers | Curriculum bias | Bourdieu |
Barriers & discrimination
Education/Labour/Politics
Weak networks & training
Precarious work
Cumulative disadvantage
5) Poverty
Poverty is multi-dimensional—absolute (basic needs unmet) or relative (below social standards). It reflects structural and policy failures.
Thinkers
Karl Marx saw poverty as structural to capitalism—exploitation and reserve labor maintain profits. Oscar Lewis described a “culture of poverty”.
Amartya Sen defined poverty as capability deprivation (loss of entitlements). Peter Townsend measured relative poverty as inability to participate in normal life.
Multidimensional
Structural exploitation
Culture of poverty
Capability deprivation
Relative standards
| Thinker | Mechanism | Concept | Implication |
|---|---|---|---|
| Marx | Exploitation | Surplus value | Change ownership |
| Lewis | Subculture | Culture of poverty | Address values & structure |
| Sen | Capability loss | Entitlements | Expand freedoms |
| Townsend | Social participation failure | Relative deprivation | Target multi-deprivation |
6) Deprivation
Deprivation is denial of material and non-material resources essential for well-being and dignity.
Thinkers
Peter Townsend defined relative deprivation as inability to participate fully in society. Walter Runciman explained grievance-based relative deprivation through social comparison.
Amartya Sen viewed deprivation as capability loss, while Martha Nussbaum specified central human capabilities—life, health, education, and dignity—as moral minima for justice.
Unequal resources
Income & time deficits
Institutional barriers
Capability losses
Health, education, mobility
UPSC Integrative Snapshot
- Stratification endures through economic (Marx), status-political (Weber, Parkin), and cultural (Bourdieu) mechanisms.
- Equality becomes substantive via citizenship (Marshall), fairness (Rawls), and capabilities (Sen, Nussbaum).
