A social class or social stratum is a grouping of people into a set of hierarchical social categories,[1] the most common being the working class, middle class, and upper class. Membership of a social class can for example be dependent on education, wealth, occupation, income, and belonging to a particular subculture or social network.[2]
Class is a subject of analysis for sociologists, political scientists, anthropologists and social historians. The term has a wide range of sometimes conflicting meanings, and there is no broad consensus on a definition of class. Some people argue that due to social mobility, class boundaries do not exist. In common parlance, the term social class is usually synonymous with socioeconomic class, defined as "people having the same social, economic, cultural, political or educational status", e.g. the working class, "an emerging professional class" etc.[3] However, academics distinguish social class from socioeconomic status, using the former to refer to one's relatively stable cultural background and the latter to refer to one's current social and economic situation which is consequently more changeable over time.[4]
The precise measurements of what determines social class in society have varied over time. Karl Marx defined class by one's relationship to the means of production (their relations of production). His understanding of classes in modern capitalist society is that the proletariat work but do not own the means of production, and the bourgeoisie, those who invest and live off the surplus generated by the proletariat's operation of the means of production, do not work at all. This contrasts with the view of the sociologist Max Weber, who contrasted class as determined by economic position, with social status (Stand) which is determined by social prestige rather than simply just relations of production.[5] The term class is etymologically derived from the Latin classis, which was used by census takers to categorize citizens by wealth in order to determine military service obligations.[6]
In the late 18th century, the term class began to replace classifications such as estates, rank and orders as the primary means of organizing society into hierarchical divisions. This corresponded to a general decrease in significance ascribed to hereditary characteristics and increase in the significance of wealth and income as indicators of position in the social hierarchy.[7] [8]
The existence of social classes is considered normal in many societies, both historic and modern, to varying degrees. It is important to note that not all systems that have social classes are the same, rather, they can vary to each other in substantial ways that reflect the respective cultures of said societies, at times even only having the shared creation of social class in common.
The existence of a class system dates back to times of Ancient Egypt, where the position of elite was also characterized by literacy.[9] The wealthier people were at the top in the social order and common people and slaves being at the bottom.[10] However, the class was not rigid; a man of humble origins could ascend to a high post.[11]
The ancient Egyptians viewed men and women, including people from all social classes, as essentially equal under the law, and even the lowliest peasant was entitled to petition the vizier and his court for redress.[12]
Farmers made up the bulk of the population, but agricultural produce was owned directly by the state, temple, or noble family that owned the land.[13] Farmers were also subject to a labor tax and were required to work on irrigation or construction projects in a corvée system.[14] Artists and craftsmen were of higher status than farmers, but they were also under state control, working in the shops attached to the temples and paid directly from the state treasury. Scribes and officials formed the upper class in ancient Egypt, known as the "white kilt class" in reference to the bleached linen garments that served as a mark of their rank.[15] The upper class prominently displayed their social status in art and literature. Below the nobility were the priests, physicians, and engineers with specialized training in their field. It is unclear whether slavery as understood today existed in ancient Egypt; there is difference of opinions among authors.[16] Although slaves were mostly used as indentured servants, they were able to buy and sell their servitude, work their way to freedom or nobility, and were usually treated by doctors in the workplace.[17]
In Ancient Greece when the clan system was declining. The classes replaced the clan society when it became too small to sustain the needs of increasing population. The division of labor is also essential for the growth of classes.[11]
Historically, social class and behavior were laid down in law. For example, permitted mode of dress in some times and places was strictly regulated, with sumptuous dressing only for the high ranks of society and aristocracy, whereas sumptuary laws stipulated the dress and jewelry appropriate for a person's social rank and station. In Europe, these laws became increasingly commonplace during the Middle Ages. However, these laws were prone to change due to societal changes, and in many cases, these distinctions may either almost disappear, such as the distinction between a patrician and a plebeian being almost erased during the late Roman Republic.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau had a large influence over political ideals of the French Revolution because of his views of inequality and classes. Rousseau saw humans as "naturally pure and good," meaning that humans from birth were seen as innocent and any evilness was learned. He believed that social problems arise through the development of society and suppress the innate pureness of humankind. He also believed that private property is the main reason for social issues in society because private property creates inequality through the property's value. Even though his theory predicted if there were no private property then there would be wide spread equality, Rousseau accepted that there will always be social inequality because of how society is viewed and run.[18]
Later Enlightenment thinkers viewed inequality as valuable and crucial to society's development and prosperity. They also acknowledged that private property will ultimately cause inequality because specific resources that are privately owned can be stored and the owners profit off of the deficit of the resource. This can create competition between the classes that was seen as necessary by these thinkers.[18] This also creates stratification between the classes keeping a distinct difference between lower, poorer classes and the higher, wealthier classes.
India (↑), Nepal, North Korea (↑), Sri Lanka (↑) and some Indigenous peoples maintain social classes today.
In class societies, class conflict has tended to recur or is ongoing, depending on the sociological and anthropolitical perspective.[19] [20] Class societies have not always existed; there have been widely different types of class communities.[21] [22] [23] For example, societies based on age rather than capital.[24] During colonialism, social relations were dismantled by force, which gave rise to societies based on the social categories of waged labor, private property, and capital.[24] [25]
Class society or class-based society is an organizing principle society in which ownership of property, means of production, and wealth is the determining factor of the distribution of power, in which those with more property and wealth are stratified higher in the society and those without access to the means of production and without wealth are stratified lower in the society. In a class society, at least implicitly, people are divided into distinct social strata, commonly referred to as social classes or castes. The nature of class society is a matter of sociological research.[26] [27] [28] Class societies exist all over the globe in both industrialized and developing nations.[29] Class stratification is theorized to come directly from capitalism.[30] In terms of public opinion, nine out of ten people in a Swedish survey considered it correct that they are living in a class society.[31]
One may use comparative methods to study class societies, using, for example, comparison of Gini coefficients, de facto educational opportunities, unemployment, and culture.[32] [33]
Societies with large class differences have a greater proportion of people who suffer from mental health issues such as anxiety and depression symptoms.[34] [35] [36] A series of scientific studies have demonstrated this relationship.[37] Statistics support this assertion and results are found in life expectancy and overall health; for example, in the case of high differences in life expectancy between two Stockholm suburbs. The differences between life expectancy of the poor and less-well-educated inhabitants who live in proximity to the station, and the highly educated and more affluent inhabitants living near Danderyd differ by 18 years.[38] [39]
Similar data about New York is also available for life expectancy, average income per capita, income distribution, median income mobility for people who grew up poor, share with a bachelor's degree or higher.[40]
In class societies, the lower classes systematically receive lower-quality education and care.[41] [42] [43] There are more explicit effects where those within the higher class actively demonize parts of the lower-class population.[33] [44]
Definitions of social classes reflect a number of sociological perspectives, informed by anthropology, economics, psychology and sociology. The major perspectives historically have been Marxism and structural functionalism. The common stratum model of class divides society into a simple hierarchy of working class, middle class and upper class. Within academia, two broad schools of definitions emerge: those aligned with 20th-century sociological stratum models of class society and those aligned with the 19th-century historical materialist economic models of the Marxists and anarchists.[45] [46] [47]
Another distinction can be drawn between analytical concepts of social class, such as the Marxist and Weberian traditions, as well as the more empirical traditions such as socioeconomic status approach, which notes the correlation of income, education and wealth with social outcomes without necessarily implying a particular theory of social structure.[48]
See main article: Class in Marxist theory and Communist society.