| Submission declined on 30 September 2024 by Theroadislong (talk). Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Closure (sociology) instead.
Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
|  |
| Submission declined on 30 September 2024 by Alpha3031 (talk). Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Closure (sociology) instead. Declined by Alpha3031 6 hours ago. | |
System of Closed Social Stratification
edit| Part of a series on |
| Sociology |
|---|
.svg) |
Social Stratification
Social stratification is a system which categorizes the people of society by ranking them in a hierarchy. It depicts socioeconomic levels and statuses of society as “layers” where the more powerful tend to be at the top layer.[1] There are four foundational principles on which social stratification is based. Social stratification is something that is generational, it is not just about individual traits/achievements, but rather a reflection of societal patterns. Social stratification is not only about inequality but it is a universal aspect of society. All societies have some sort of social stratification, but the way in which a society is structured and distinguishes the stratification within said society.[2] In most societies, stratification is set up as an economic system where people are categorized based on their assets and income. There are other factors that attribute to social stratification within a society, including: gender, age, race, religion, occupation, network, and/ or education.
Closed Systems of Social Stratification
A system of closed stratification, or social closure, is one where there is little to no mobility of ascribed social statuses. In other words, the societal status that one is assigned at birth cannot be altered.[3] In socially closed societies stratified members are unable to be mobile between other classes, nor can they have relationships between the levels/classes. Some prominent examples of closed social stratification systems throughout history have been the caste system in India, the estate system of feudal Europe, South Africa’s apartheid, and the racial-based slavery in the United States of America.
Main Theorists of Social Closure
editFrank Parkin (1931–2011) was a British sociologist renowned for his work on social closure and critiques of Marxist class theory. He was born in Durham, England, and attended the University of Durham, where he earned his undergraduate degree. He later completed his PhD at the London School of Economics (LSE), focusing on social stratification and class inequality.
Parkin began his academic career as a lecturer and eventually became a professor of sociology at the University of Kent. His notable works include "Middle Class Radicalism" [4], "Class Inequality and Political Order"[5], and "Marxism and Class Theory: A Bourgeois Critique"(1979)[6], which introduced his most famous concept of social closure. Frank Parkin’s "Marxism and Class Theory: A Bourgeois Critique" revolutionized the concept of social stratification by introducing social closure. Parkin critiqued traditional Marxist views that focused solely on ownership of the means of production, emphasizing instead that groups maintain power by restricting access to resources. Parkin identified two key groups of closure:
- Exclusionary Closure the process by which dominant groups (such as the bourgeoisie) secure privileged positions by monopolizing resources and opportunities, often by using attributes like race, education, or social status as criteria for exclusion. This strategy is particularly evident in professional fields, where credentials are required to access high-status positions.
- Usurpationary Closure occurs when subordinate groups (like the proletariat) challenge these established boundaries to claim access to resources. This process aims to break down the exclusionary barriers imposed by dominant groups and redistribute resources more equitably.
Max Weber's ideas form the foundation of Parkin’s theory of closure. Weber saw social stratification as resulting from the unequal distribution of power across economic, social, and political dimensions. He emphasized that groups attempt to monopolize opportunities by restricting access based on social attributes like class, race, religion, or status. Weber's notion of closure suggested that exclusion could be based on virtually any group attribute that could be used to control access to resources. Weber thus laid the groundwork for understanding how social closure mechanisms operate within a broader context of power dynamics/[7]
Randall Collins extended Parkin’s closure theory to educational systems in his book "The Credential Society" in 1979.[8] Collins argued that formal education systems act as mechanisms of exclusionary closure by restricting access to professional fields through credentialing. This process limits opportunities for social mobility, as those without the required qualifications are excluded from high-status jobs.[9]
Raymond Murphy
Raymond Murphy expanded Parkin’s ideas in "Social Closure: The Theory of Monopolization and Exclusion" (1988)[10]. Murphy applied closure theory beyond class, exploring how social closure operates in gender, race, and bureaucratic systems. He argued that rationalization of monopolization practices, such as bureaucratic processes and formal regulations, often leads to irrational outcomes that reinforce inequality. Murphy's extension of Weber's and Parkin's theories highlights the pervasive nature of social closure in maintaining stratification across different societal dimensions.[11]
Opposition to Theory of Social Closure
editConflict Theory is a contrarian interpretation of the functionalist perspective of the Theory of Closed Social Stratification, the theory views social inequality as the most fundamental source of conflict in human society rather than necessary and beneficial for the stability and efficiency of society.[12] From this perspective, social stratification results from the exploitation of the weaker class by the one in power, perpetuation the advantages of being in the upper class while only disadvantaging the less powerful.
Karl Marx was a staunch dissident of the Theory of Closed Social Stratification, and his work has a tremendous influence on modern-day believers of Conflict Theory. Marx believed that the class division between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat was catastrophic as it directly led to exploitation and significant problems within a society.[13] He interpreted history as a long period of class struggles, with each stage of societal development marked by conflict between oppressors and the oppressed. In a capitalist society, Marx predicted that this conflict in a society dominated by classes would eventually result in revolution, leading to a classless socialist society with no inequality.[14]
Jean-Jacques Rousseau, another dissident thinker of the Theory of Closed Social Stratification, believed in his Social Contract theory, advocating for equality and collective governance not outlined by class. Rousseau believed that actual authority and power are rooted in the will of the people, not controlled by inherited social roles and classes dominating the social order.[15] This rejection of social hierarchies in place of an emphasis on common will was starkly at odds with many societies functioning within this Theory of Closed Social Stratification, in stark contrast to many of the monarchies and feudal societies of his time.
Melvin Tumin, a more modern thinker and American sociologist, is another critic of the Theory of Closed Social Stratification, and in particular, The Davis–Moore hypothesis, which argued for the necessity of social stratification in society to promote productivity and efficiency.[16] Tumlin argued that in a society dominated by social classes that rewarded the upper classes disproportionately to the lower classes, there exists an implied sentiment that the most rewarded positions in society are the most important.[17] Tumin posits that in this system, unequal privileges are attached to different positions of society, disadvantaging jobs like unskilled workmen. Because, as Tumin argues, the is no objective way of measuring functional importance of positions within a society, the difference in importance between a lawyer or doctor versus a farmer is arbitrary.
Examples of Structural Social Closure
editThere are several examples throughout history in which social closure was enforced by the societal structure, norms, or institutions of the time.
The caste system in India, which dates back to 1500 BCE, represents an example of social closure. The caste system, which began being reformed in the post-colonial era, relegated Indian citizens to certain hierarchical groups (castes) based on birth which are nearly impossible to move between.[18] It is important to note however, that sociologists argue about the rigidity of the caste system in India. Russian-American sociologist Pitirim Sorokin argues India in the 20th century is the most realistic example of a completely closed system of social stratification.[19] In the modern day, discrimination based on caste is illegal, but the lasting effects of the caste system can still be seen today.
The feudal system was the primary societal structure of medieval Europe. Feudalist societies were structured around land ownership, wherein the landowning elites (nobles and lords) governed peasants who lived on their land. In a feudal society land ownership and wealth was passed down, leaving the elites in power, while the serfs had little to no ability to move up in the socioeconomic ranks.[20] The feudal system represents social closure, because in this society social class is determined at birth.
The Apartheid in South Africa (1948 - 1994) is a recent example of institutionally enforced social closure. Under apartheid, South Africans were classified by race, and their race determined their access to education, employment and housing. The white South Africans, despite being the racial minority, enjoyed political power, wealth, and resources unavailable to their Black and Coloured counterparts. During the apartheid South African maintained a race-based social hierarchy, denying Black South Africans any social mobility until its dismantlement in 1994.
Racial Based Slavery
Slavery in the United States, was race based, which created a closed, socially stratified society. In some Southern states enslaved people were classified as property. Enslaved people and their descendants were confined to the lowest rungs of American society, with no hope of moving to a higher social class. While slavery has been abolished, the impact race-based slavery has had on Black americans can still be felt today.
Examples of Partial Social Closure
editWhile none of the following examples represent complete closed systems of stratification, all contain aspects of a closed social stratification.
African Americans were legally and socially segregated from whites, with strict rules preventing them from accessing the same education, housing, and economic opportunities. The system was akin to a caste system, where mobility between racial groups was impossible
Individuals born into poverty or working-class families often find it difficult to move into the middle or upper classes due to barriers like unequal access to education, healthcare, and employment opportunities.[21]The intergenerational transfer of wealth (through inheritance, education, and networks) helps to maintain the positions of those at the top of the economic ladder, creating a de facto closed stratification.
Elite Networks
Membership in elite social circles (e.g., attending Ivy League schools, being part of exclusive social clubs, or having access to certain industries) can create closed-off networks that limit opportunities for outsiders, especially those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds.[22]
Criminal Justice System
The U.S. has one of the highest incarceration rates in the world, and the criminal justice system disproportionately affects racial minorities, particularly Black and Latino men. A criminal record severely limits a person's ability to find employment, housing, and educational opportunities, effectively trapping individuals in a lower social class. In many ways, the system creates a caste-like barrier between those with criminal records and the rest of society.
Native American Isolation
Native American communities in the U.S. have faced centuries of legal and economic isolation through forced relocation, broken treaties, and the reservation system.[23] Many reservations are economically disadvantaged and geographically isolated, limiting access to quality education, healthcare, and employment. This creates a form of closed social stratification where Native Americans may find it difficult to integrate fully into the broader economy or society.
Undocumented Immigrants in the United States
Many undocumented immigrants in the U.S. face significant barriers to social mobility, as they are often excluded from formal employment, educational opportunities, and social services. They may be trapped in low-wage, unstable jobs with limited legal protections, creating a closed stratification system based on legal status
References
edit- ^ Conerly, T. R., Holmes, K., & Tamang, A. L. (n.d.). 9.1 what is social stratification? - introduction to sociology 3E. OpenStax. https://openstax.org/books/introduction-sociology-3e/pages/9-1-what-is-social-stratification
- ^ Knoke, D. (1993). Networks of elite structure and decision making . Sage Journals. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0049124193022001002
- ^ Libretexts. (2021, February 20). 9.4C: Open vs. closed Stratification Systems. Social Sci LibreTexts. https://socialsci.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Sociology/Introduction_to_Sociology/Sociology_(Boundless)/09:_Stratification_Inequality_and_Social_Class_in_the_U.S./9.04:_Social_Mobility/9.4C:_Open_vs._Closed_Stratification_Systems
- ^ Hansen, G. E. (1969). Middle Class Radicalism: The Social Bases of the British Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament. By Frank Parkin. (New York: Frederick A. Praeger, Publishers, 1968.). American Political Science Review, 63(1), 194–195. doi:10.1017/S0003055400261704
- ^ Armstrong, J. A. (1973). Class Inequality and Political Order: Social Stratification in Capitalist and Communist Societies. By Frank Parkin. (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1971.). American Political Science Review, 67(1), 272–273. doi:10.2307/1958595
- ^ Parkin, F. (1979). Marxism and class theory: A bourgeois critique. Columbia University Press.
- ^ https://cpaess.ucar.edu/gold-blogs/social-closure-introduction-and-some-broad-examples
- ^ Collins, R. (1979). The credential society: An historical sociology of education and stratification. Academic Press.
- ^ https://cpaess.ucar.edu/gold-blogs/social-closure-introduction-and-some-broad-examples
- ^ Murphy, R. (1988). Social closure: The theory of monopolization and exclusion. Oxford University Press.
- ^ https://cpaess.ucar.edu/gold-blogs/social-closure-introduction-and-some-broad-examples
- ^ Conflict Theory of Social Stratification.” Web Notes on Conflict Theory of Social Stratification for Sociology Optional for UPSC with Bansal Sir Preparation, abhipedia.abhimanu.com/Article/sociology/MzYwNjg2/Conflict-Theory-of-Social-Stratification-Stratification-in-Society. Accessed 29 Sept. 2024.
- ^ Conerly, Tonja R., et al. “9.4 Theoretical Perspectives on Social Stratification - Introduction to Sociology 3E.” OpenStax, OpenStax, openstax.org/books/introduction-sociology-3e/pages/9-4-theoretical-perspectives-on-social-stratification. Accessed 29 Sept. 2024.
- ^ “Theoretical Perspectives on Social Stratification: Intro to Sociology Class Notes.” Fiveable, library.fiveable.me/intro-to-sociology/unit-9/4-theoretical-perspectives-social-stratification/study-guide/tbMOuQ08OnpHWv2D. Accessed 29 Sept. 2024.
- ^ Tucker, Luke. “Rousseau’s Social Contract Theory.” Philosophical Thought, Tulsa Community College, 12 Aug. 2022, open.library.okstate.edu/introphilosophy/chapter/rousseaus_social_contract-theory/.
- ^ Griffiths, Heather, et al. “Theoretical Perspectives on Social Stratification.” Introduction to Sociology 2e, OpenStax, 1 Feb. 2012, wtcs.pressbooks.pub/introsociology2e/chapter/theoretical-perspectives-on-social-stratification/#:~:text=The%20Davis%2DMoore%20thesis%2C%20though,people%20something%20to%20strive%20for.
- ^ “Melvin Tumin’s Critique of Theory of Social Stratification.” Sociologyguide.Com, www.sociologyguide.com/socio-short-notes/view-short-notes.php?id=22. Accessed 29 Sept. 2024.
- ^ Naudet, J. (2019, August 20). Is India a closed society?. OpenEdition Books. https://books.openedition.org/editionscnrs/13074?lang=en
- ^ “The Asian Side of the World - II.” CNRS Éditions EBooks, CNRS Éditions, 1 Jan. 2015, books.openedition.org/editionscnrs/13089. Accessed 9 Sept. 2024.
- ^ Cartwright, Mark. “Feudalism.” World History Encyclopedia, World History Publishing, 22 Nov. 2018, www.worldhistory.org/Feudalism/.
- ^ Wealth inequality. Inequality.org. (2024, April 23). Wealth inequality. Inequality.org. (2024, April 23). https://inequality.org/facts/wealth-inequality/
- ^ KNOKE, D. (1993). Networks of Elite Structure and Decision Making. Sociological Methods & Research, 22(1), 23-45. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124193022001002
- ^ Marchiò, G. (2022, March 23). Cultural assimilation of Native Americans. Human Rights Pulse. https://www.humanrightspulse.com/mastercontentblog/cultural-assimilation-of-native-americans