Under Class people are described of having various characteristics, these being poor, homeless, OAP’s single parents etc. Divorce is likely to occur in this class because there is very little stability and security in the young relationships, crime is another occurrence as people feel the need to increase the amount of their possessions and they would do this by stealing from others, or it could be because they cannot find the money to pay for goods themselves so they turn to crime to solve their problems. Giddens argues that women and ethnic minorities are particularly likely to be found in this class, because women are often likely to put a hold on their career to start a family, or get married etc. Giddens.A (1997)
Marxs describes people in the lowest group of all as “Lumpenproletariat” They are seen as “This scum of the depraved elements of all classes…decayed roués, vagabonds, discharged soldiers, discharged jail birds, escaped galley slaves, swindlers, mountebanks, lazzaroni, pickpockets, tricksters, gamblers, brothel keepers, tinkers, beggars, the dangerous class, the social scum, that passively rotting mass thrown off by the lowest layers of the old society” (Marx and Engels 1950 Haralambos & Holborn)
Although at times Marx did refer these people as a class, at other times he dismissed the idea that they form a class because he saw then as having little potential for developing class awareness or taking collective action.
As evidence of class and criminality it can be shown by the article from out the Birmingham Post, it explains about how a “Mother and son could face custody” (Appendices 1)
They have been harassing shopkeepers, and customers in a Birmingham suburb. The children involved are aged 14 and 17 seem to have nothing more to do than go around giving racial abuse to them and being involved in criminal damage, vandalism and graffiti. Its not just one occurrence they have been summand as a result of a number of incidents.
The arrival and different stages of children’s growing up, may for instance, exert significant pressures on parents’ interests in such items in their implicit contract as income level and degree of security. Watson. T (1994)
The children have obviously not come from a very good background, the group they belong to maybe lower class. The article just goes to show how people, not only at a young age but also from the class group who have a high chance of being convicted of a crime. It is not just based on crime; it shows that they were involved in racial abuse to shopkeepers. This does not only cause distress to the shopkeepers, but they are encouraging other people both adults and children to the same thing.
Functionalists believe that society is based on agreement therefore everyone needs to co – operate for society to function better. Social order can be achieved by shared norms and values, and social control mechanisms. They also believe that their needs to be a social class to put society in consensus, everyone has to participate. Marx contradicted the functionalist’s theory; he described them “the key classes in the capitalist mode of production are the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, or capitalists and kindles wage labourers” (Marx (1818 – 1883) A.Giddens
Bourgeoisie (the people who owned factories and the workers), proletariat subject class (the people who sold their labour in return for wages).
Social Action theory doesn’t believe that social class exists between us, it focuses on how people define themselves, each other and situations in the workplace, and each and every one of us is different.
Postmodernism totally agree with the statement made by John Major that they dismiss class ever existed. Postmodernists have a different approach to other sociologists; they believe that it is possible to explain both human behaviour and the ways in which societies are changing, they don’t like to impose their views on others, but should merely enable the voices of different people to be heard, this is where they are different to Marxists and Functionalists who let out to produce scientific explanations of how the society works and how social groups behave.
They argue that social behaviour is no longer shaped as it used to be by people background and their socialisation. Factors such as class, ethnic group, male or female influences people a great deal less than they used to. People nowadays are freer to choose their own identity and lifestyle.
Meritocracy is a system that you get what you deserve if you work solid and aim for it, and then you will succeed and get it, despite what class you were born into. UK society is mainly meritocracy because people who work hard and make good use of their talents, which they have already got, then you are considered successful and are thought more of, and therefore you will receive a high award.
There are various branches in feminism but most of them share some common features. The four types of feminism are liberal, Marxist, Radical and Black Feminism. A liberal feminism explains that the situation according to liberal feminists lies not so much in the structures and institutions of society, but in its culture and the attitudes of individuals. They have supported world of work, the Sex Discrimination Act (1975) and the Equal Pay Act (1970). They basically just want equal treatment. The key area of the Marxist Feminism was inequality. It was based on male rules understanding the subordination of women in capitalist societies and they also argue that it is essential to recognize the domination of women in such societies. The Radical Feminism sees society as patriarchal, they want men out and think that they are all evil. They are seen to be exploited because they undertake unpaid employment for men by carrying out childcare, housework etc. Men ruled the Black Feminism so the women’s issues had no thought. It was based on race, gender, class in shaping the lives of black women and restricting their life chances. Also all the white feminists ignored the concerns of the black women.
I disagree with John Major’s comments where he suggests that class is becoming les important, with an individual’s position increasingly based on that person’s own ability.
Marx’s, Functionalist, Feminist all believe that we have class, every single one of us belong in one of the four classes depending on our income, wealth, occupation etc. Class continues to have a wide and general usage, in lots of different ways we interpret clues about ourselves and others which indicates what class we belong in, such as what we wear, how we speak, and eat etc. The functionalists created an opportunity for the lower class to rise above the aristocrats and failed due to the creation of the middle class.
Class is like a culture and it exists today and I think it will be around for a long time, we will never seem to live in a classless society. People who may have talent may not have fortune, and the ones who have fortune may have no talent to be successful in life, or you could even not choose to be successful because you are already wealthy. Fortune could be passed on to you through the spread of wealth, which could then affect your status. If you were in the lower class and then have been given wealth you automatically go up into the upper class where everything you do would be different.
I think that belonging to a certain group affects your occupation in the world of work. It all depends on what class you belong to and what talents you have.
If you have come from a working class or underclass group you have less chance of getting a good job / career due to the lack of funds for education. Also females from this group are said not to stay in a long-term job because of starting families, so therefore managers would rather take on a male where they now that the job role would be more secure. Women in the workforce tend to be concentrated in low paid, low status jobs. The low paid jobs could be anything from cleaning, being a nursery nurse, checkout operators etc. There is evidence of the idea that the “Glass ceiling” still exists, it’s where the women know where they want to go in life but they cant get there.
“Members of minority ethnic groups have shown that in general terms they are employed in less skilled jobs, at lower job levels, and are concerned in a particular industrial sectors” (Brown 1984; Smith, 1976) D Mason.
Women in the UK think that because of their race they cannot get jobs, but it is also due to the fact that they might be lacking skills, and qualifications.
“Women clearly feel that race is a barrier to career choice and career progression. Employers should take note. They cannot afford to ignore the concerns of half of Britain’s workforce. It is still a fact that women do less well than men in the workplace. They are paid less. They are promoted less often. And they face greater harassment and bullying at work. Ethnic minority women face all of these problems with the added dimension of racial discrimination on top.” Beverley Bernard, Deputy Chair of the CRE. (Commission for Racial Equality)
Ethnic employees have significantly lower earnings than white employees. Their employers discriminate against ethnic minority groups by refusing to employ them, employing them into a low paid job, or refusing to promote them to be more important.
Marxists also agrees that ethnic minorities are disadvantaged in capitalist societies, but he doesn’t agree that they form an underclass in Britain.
Appendices
1
Bibliography
Book Sources
Giddens, A (1997) Sociology: Introductory Readings. Cambridge: Polity Press
Haralambos, M. Holborn, M. (2000) “Sociology Themes and perspectives, 5th Edition, London: Harper Collins Publishers Ltd
Marsh, I. (1996) Sociology: Making sense of Society. London: Longman
Mason, D. (2000) Race and Ethnicity in Modern Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Watson, T. (1994) Sociology, Work & Industry. London: Routledge
Internet sources
(Commission for Racial Equality)
Newspaper Sources
Birmingham Post Newspaper, Wednesday 10th April 2002