It is quite obvious that the structure of any society is not homogeneous, since it is always divided into various groups according to nationality, class, gender, demographics and other characteristics. It is this type of heterogeneity that gives rise to such injustices in the social order as hidden violence and infringement of human dignity.

Of course, in the modern world the forms of influence of some groups of people over others are no longer so strongly expressed, which was the order of things in epic times. This happens because the social hierarchy in a democratic society is subordinated, first of all, to the principles of “European humanism”, which exclude any form of aggressive coercion outside the legal field.

General concept of social inequality

Over the entire history of human existence, a variety of models of state, political and economic structure have been tested, under which it has never been able to achieve that “golden balance” of social structure, when all individuals could be endowed with the same living conditions offered by society. And it is the concept of “social inequality” that determines the different levels of accessibility of different social groups to such resources as power, fame and finance.

It turns out that social stratification (a system of criteria for the stratification of society into various social groups) is objectively included in any model of human society, since only under the condition of class differences is society sufficiently motivated for its progressive development. Indeed, even in the primitive structure of primitive society, when leaders ruled clans or tribes, there was a clear hierarchy, implying the existence of power and subordinate structures.

With the development of society, the hierarchy of the social structure itself became more complex. Humanity has not only developed economically and achieved continuous improvement of political forms of interaction, trying a variety of government levers of control, but has always been concerned with achieving an optimal balance between all social groups of the population. It is the balanced interaction between all layers of society that leads to the most effective development and comfortable conditions for interaction between them.

By the way, the historical experience of our country can also be considered an objective contribution to the global body of knowledge on this issue. After all, communist society as an ideal form of social justice could not be created. And at that stage of its construction, when developed socialism was to become a harbinger of the crown of social justice, society was stratified not only into the classes of workers and peasants proclaimed by the state (the intelligentsia was considered a stratum and a temporary phenomenon, and the partyocracy was not classified into a separate group, associating itself with the official classes), but also on those social structures that govern the people in all spheres of life.

It turns out that social inequality is an objectively determined instrument of any social structure, since it is precisely this that creates the necessary motivating structures for the normal development of humanity.

Causes of social inequality

Despite the many options for assessing social inequality from the legislators of the scientific community on this issue, including Herbert Spencer, Ludwig Gumplowicz, William Sumner, Karl Marx and others, only two basic reasons for its occurrence can be named.

The first of these is the uneven distribution by society material resources which it has. It is the difference in the assessment of each person’s contribution to the common treasury of human values ​​that is the fundamental reason for the generation of inequality. Naturally, each individual makes his own unique contribution to the development of society, which depends on his individual level of capabilities and the willingness of society to accept this work from him.

The second factor in the emergence of social inequality is the principle of inheritance of the rights to own various values ​​and privileges that give additional features for the distribution of various types of resources (power, prestige and money). Modern people in our country more than once face, for example, the problem of employment, when, other things being equal, it is protectionism that becomes the decisive factor for occupying a position of interest or implementing a professional project.

The last reason for social inequality is based both on the unequal availability of decent education for different social groups of the population, and on different professional start-ups with the same level of training. Here we can distinguish subjective and objective criteria, which are expressed in the possession of levels of material wealth, education, income, position and other resources. Despite a fairly stable part of modern society, called the “middle class,” the difference between other social groups of Russian society can truly be considered “mad.” After all, the abyss between the oligarchs and the homeless cannot be considered justified only because some are involved in managing the domestic economy, while others have lost even the meaning of their existence.

And even the middle class in Russia currently cannot be considered that part of modern society where social justice has triumphed, because this class today is only in the stage of formation. Moreover, the difference between its conditionally “elite” and the “bottom” is also becoming striking, which eloquently demonstrates the relevance of this topic.

The apparatus of officials also deserves special words, which, by definition of the order of things, has an increased resource in the distribution of various benefits and privileges. Indeed, in connection with their positions, these civil servants exercise appropriate control and supervision, which accordingly leads to their status.

In addition, it is important to remember the human essence itself, which has always been focused on climbing the social ladder, guided solely by the personal motive of achieving the most advantageous position in society.

Classification of types of social inequality

When considering the topic of social inequality, it is important to operate with such a concept as “social deprivation” (a decrease in an individual’s ability to communicate within society in functional and cultural aspects).

In this context, four categories of deprivation should be distinguished: economic, social, ethical and mental.

Economic deprivation results from the uneven distribution of society's material resources. In this matter, two factors should be distinguished: objective and subjective. It is precisely due to the presence of subjective deprivation that sometimes a situation arises when a completely sufficient person tends to feel that his abilities are underestimated. This situation today is quite favorable soil for the creation, for example, of new religious movements.

Social deprivation as motivation social development uses resources such as power, prestige and money. This happens in order to distinguish certain groups of people from the general mass.

Ethical deprivation often arises between society and intellectuals due to a value conflict of interests. This disagreement arises because the moral ideals of individuals and groups diverge from generally accepted norms.

Mental deprivation is similar to ethical deprivation. However, the disagreement between an individual or group of people and society concerns exclusively such values ​​as the meaning of life, faith in God, and the search for new life priorities. It should be understood that mental deprivation often follows from economic or social deprivation and is aimed at leveling objective forms of deprivation.

Adaptation to social inequality

Despite the dissatisfaction of many members of society with social inequality, one should still take into account the universal nature of this instrument for motivating the development of society throughout its existence.

Since social stratification is objectively determined by economic, political and state norms of social development, it should be perceived exclusively as an inevitable cost of historical development. Of course, unequal access to material and spiritual values ​​of public consumption causes a lot of indignation among the “disadvantaged” group of people.

However, one should always remember that today the socio-economic heterogeneity of labor and the inheritance of advantageous positions in social stratification are objectively determined by the historical facts of the development of society. So the only way to achieve social justice should be considered the free and feasible contribution of everyone to its development. In addition, modern society is developing quite seriously in the field of fixing and expanding the rights and privileges of less protected sections of society. So, positive dynamics in this aspect of society’s life are obvious.

Aspects of inequality

Inequality in human society acts as one of the current objects of sociological research. Its reasons also lie in several main aspects.

Inequality initially implies different opportunities and unequal access to available social and material goods. Among these benefits are the following:

1. Income is a certain amount of money that a person receives per unit of time. Often, income is directly the wage that is paid for the labor produced by a person and the physical or mental strength expended. In addition to labor, it can also be the ownership of property that “works.” Thus, the lower a person’s income, the lower the level he is in the hierarchy of society;
2. Education is a complex of knowledge, skills and abilities acquired by a person during his stay in educational institutions. Educational attainment is measured by the number of years of schooling. These can range from 9 years (junior high school). For example, a professor may have more than 20 years of education behind him; accordingly, he will be at a much higher level than a person who has completed 9 grades;
3. Power is the ability of an individual to impose his worldview and point of view on wider sections of the population, regardless of their desire. The level of power is measured by the number of people over which it extends;
4. Prestige is a position in society and its assessment, which has developed on the basis of public opinion.

Causes of social inequality

For a long time, many researchers have wondered whether society can exist in principle if there is no inequality or hierarchy in it. In order to answer this question, it is necessary to understand the causes of social inequality.

Different approaches interpret this phenomenon and its causes differently. Let's analyze the most influential and famous ones.

Note 1

Functionalism explains the phenomenon of inequality based on diversity social functions. These functions are inherent in different layers, classes and communities.

The functioning and development of social relations are possible only under the condition of division of labor. In this situation, each social group solves problems that are vital for the entire society. Some are engaged in the creation and production of material goods, while the activities of others are aimed at creating spiritual values. A control layer is also needed that will control the activities of the first two - hence the third.

For the successful functioning of society, a combination of all three of the above types of human activity is simply necessary. Some turn out to be the most important, and some the least. Thus, based on the hierarchies of functions, a hierarchy of classes and layers that perform them is formed.

Status explanation of social inequality. It is based on observations of the actions and behavior of specific individuals. As we understand, every person who occupies a certain place in society automatically acquires his status. Hence the opinion that social inequality is, first of all, inequality of status. It stems both from the ability of individuals to perform a certain role, and from the opportunities that allow a person to achieve a certain position in society.

In order for an individual to fulfill one or another social role, he needs to have certain skills, abilities and qualities (to be competent, sociable, to have the appropriate knowledge and skills to be a teacher, engineer). The opportunities that allow a person to achieve a particular position in society are, for example, ownership of property, capital, origin from a famous and wealthy family, belonging to a high class or political forces.

An economic view of the causes of social inequality. In accordance with this point of view, the main reason for social inequality lies in unequal treatment of property and distribution of material goods. This approach manifested itself most clearly under Marxism, when it was the emergence private property led to social stratification of society and the formation of antagonistic classes.

Problems of social inequality

Social inequality is a very common phenomenon, and therefore, like many other manifestations in society, it faces a number of problems.

Firstly, problems of inequality arise simultaneously in two of the most developed areas of society: in public and economic sphere.

When we talk about problems of inequality in the public sphere, it is worth mentioning the following manifestations of instability:

1. Uncertainty about one’s future, as well as about the stability of the position in which the individual currently finds himself;
2. Suspension of production due to dissatisfaction on the part of various segments of the population, which leads to a shortage of products for others;
3. Growing social tension, which can lead to consequences such as riots, social conflicts;
4. Lack of real social elevators that will allow you to move up the social ladder both from bottom to top and vice versa - from top to bottom;
5. Psychological pressure due to a feeling of unpredictability of the future, lack of clear forecasts for further development.

In the economic sphere, the problems of social inequality are expressed as follows: an increase in government costs for production certain goods or services, partially unfair distribution of income (it is not those who actually work and use their physical strength who receive it, but those who invest more money), respectively, from here comes another significant problem - unequal access to resources.

Note 2

A special feature of the problem of inequality of access to resources is that it is both a cause and a consequence of modern social inequality.

In human society, social inequality remains one of the most acute problems, the solution of which excites the minds of politicians and philosophers. IN modern Russia the scale of social inequality is colossal. Even in comparison with other developed countries of the world, Russia is a real “land of contrasts.” There is a huge gap between rich and poor here. Higher levels of inequality are found only in developing countries in Africa and Asia. But attitudes towards social inequality in Russian society vary. Some blame the injustice of privatization for high social polarization, others defend the “original” inequality of people and are convinced that the most active and capable people get resources that allow them to greatly increase the social distance from others - the unlucky and passive.

Classes in the Union, before the revolution and in post-Soviet Russia

In modern Russian society, a distinct class structure began to take shape after the Soviet Union last years Its existence began the formation of a class of entrepreneurs - owners. Before this, in the USSR the social structure of the population was strikingly different from the capitalist countries of the world. Most Western countries have a lot in common in character social structure population. As a rule, in developed Western countries there are five main strata. Firstly, this is the elite. This social stratum includes super-rich people - large entrepreneurs - industrialists and financiers, show business stars, politicians, generals, hereditary aristocracy. The second group is the upper middle class, consisting of representatives of top management and high-status officials, as well as professionals highly qualified. The third group is the middle class, or “professionals,” which includes highly qualified specialists, usually engineers, doctors, teachers, lawyers, officers and many others. This class is distinguished by the presence of education and the relatively high income of its representatives, but does not have serious power and financial resources.

The fourth layer - the “base” - consists of the bulk of skilled workers, who, however, do not have higher education and cannot get into a higher social stratum due to being in lower status positions. Meanwhile, the incomes of this part of the population are very high and it is impossible to consider them “social lower classes.” Moreover, they perform qualified work and have official status. Finally, the fifth layer is the so-called precariat. The main difference between the precariat as a class in the modern world is the absence social guarantees. “Precaria” work in an unstable regime and do not have a clearly established wages. At the same time, this category of workers can include both freelance specialists and people without education or any qualifications who earn odd jobs. In any case, the situation of the precariat is characterized by extreme social instability, which also affects financial condition, and on the political loyalty of representatives of the “non-guaranteed” segment of the labor market. In addition to the precariat, there is, of course, also the real social lower classes - the world of the lumpen, people without education, burdened with the burden of numerous social vices, most often who are or have been for a long time in serious trouble with the law. The world of lumpen is a special social environment, which does not make sense to consider within the framework of traditional concepts of “poverty” or “prosperity”, since a representative of this social stratum can spend a lot of money to satisfy their needs for alcohol or drugs, but at the same time lead everyday life in real poverty. It is this feature of representatives of the lumpen population that makes them so different from the rest of the category of the poor and, at the same time, takes them somewhat beyond the scope of our article itself.

In pre-revolutionary Russia, according to a study by St. Petersburg sociologist Boris Mironov (see Sociological Research magazine, No. 8, 2014), the poorest segment of society consisted of unskilled workers and lumpen people. In the lowest income group of the Russian population in 1901-1904. included: 1) beggars, vagabonds, wanderers, inhabitants of almshouses; 2) agricultural workers (farmers); 3) day laborers and laborers; 4) women and children employed in industrial production. However, social inequality in Russian Empire was not as large-scale as in the United States or Great Britain. At the same time, American citizens, in terms of ruble equivalent, were much richer than Russian residents. If to the richest Russians in 1900-1910. were people with an average income of 991 rubles, then the richest Americans were people with an average income of 8,622 rubles. At the same time, in Russia, unlike Western countries, there was no large stratum of the middle class that already existed in the West, and the overwhelming majority of the country's population in their lifestyle was very different from the insignificant layer of the aristocracy, wealthy merchants and manufacturers. This difference is evidenced, at least, by the almost total illiteracy of the broad masses of the Russian population, which already in the post-revolutionary period gave rise to an obvious need for the mass elimination of illiteracy among the adult population of the Soviet state.

In modern Russia, due to its historical and political specifics, a slightly different type of social structure has developed. It is distinguished, firstly, by a high level of fusion between government and big business. It is often difficult to understand “where a businessman ends and an official begins” and vice versa. Famous sociologist O.I. Shkaratan (Shkaratan O.I. Socio-economic inequality and its reproduction in modern Russia. M, 2009) believes that modern Russian society is divided into the following main groups. Firstly, this is an extremely small class of large and medium-sized owners - somewhere around 4% of the population. Secondly, this is the “middle class” - small entrepreneurs, managers, professionals working “for themselves”. There are no more than 22% of them. Finally, the third group consists of performers - non-owners. These include 74% of the Russian population - here are “state employees”, and ordinary employees of private companies, and the working class. Of course, this model of class classification in modern Russia is very conditional, but it more or less accurately reflects the division of Russian society on such an issue as the attitude to property. There are very few full-fledged owners in Russia, and in this the country differs from Western countries, where there are developed traditions of entrepreneurship. It is known that the number of small and medium-sized enterprises and, accordingly, people employed in the field of small and medium-sized businesses in modern Russia is much smaller than in most developed countries of the world. Meanwhile, this is a very alarming trend, since small and medium-sized businessmen, who represent the basis of the “middle class,” are a very stable and socially stable contingent, as a rule, patriotic, active, that is, they represent great value for the country. It would seem that the Russian state should support small and medium-sized entrepreneurs, but in practice it turns out that small and medium business most often experiences quite serious problems in the country.

The specificity of the Russian situation lies in the fact that in Russia, as in many countries belonging to the “third world,” the possession of power resources often turns out to be more significant than the possession of property, even large ones. For example, the positions of an employee of law enforcement agencies or the administration of a city, district, or rural settlement may turn out to be more significant than the positions of an entrepreneur, even though formally a security officer or official belongs to the class of performers, and an entrepreneur belongs to the class of owners. Secondly, in Russia, due to the colossal geographical differences between its regions, there is also an obvious division between residents of the capital and residents of the province, residents of large cities and small towns and, even more so, rural areas. Thus, even a low-income resident of the capital, who does not work or works in a non-status and low-paid job, but owns housing in Moscow, by selling his home and moving to the province, can turn into a wealthy “rentier”, living on interest from a deposit in the bank of funds received for the sold property. real estate. The sale of even inexpensive housing by Moscow standards will give him the opportunity to have a very high income for the province. That is, there is both a “power” plane of social inequality and a “geographical” plane of social inequality. In the first plane, the following groups can be distinguished: 1) representatives of senior officials; 2) representatives of the middle layer of administrative workers, senior officers of law enforcement agencies; 3) private entrepreneurs 4) the base layer of performers who do not have power resources; 5) social lower classes. In the second plane, the following categories are clearly distinguished: 1) residents of the capital of the country - Moscow; 2) residents of St. Petersburg and the suburbs of Moscow; 3) residents of the main large urban centers (Ekaterinburg, Novosibirsk, Rostov-on-Don, Krasnoyarsk, etc.); 4) residents regional centers; 5) residents of small towns and regional centers; 6) residents of rural areas. Of course, within each of the listed categories there is also its own differentiation - for example, the situation of residents of coastal cities, who have the opportunity to derive income from the resort business and trade, and residents of depressed cities and settlements - former mining and factory villages and towns - are different.

About the causes of poverty

Of course, anyone who asks about the problems of social inequality in modern Russia inevitably faces the question of what are the main causes of poverty. Why are some people able to maintain a more or less decent standard of living, while other people find themselves literally on the brink of survival? According to sociological research, representatives of the Russian lower strata of society themselves cite long-term lack of work, small amounts of state social benefits, and family misfortunes and incidents as the main reasons for their own poverty. Indeed, unemployment is a very serious problem for Russia, especially in small towns and rural areas, and a long-term lack of work and regular income inevitably throws a person into a marginal environment and contributes to the marginalization of his way of life. On the other hand, the main social payments remain insignificant, if not insignificant - pensions for the majority of employees; benefits for single mothers and large families; survivor benefits; unemployment benefits; pensions for disabled people. Many pensioners in Russia still receive 6 thousand rubles a month, and this despite the fact that the rent for modest housing can reach half of the stated pension amount. At the same time, many Russians surveyed by sociologists are convinced that poverty in modern Russia is often caused by social vices - drunkenness, drug addiction, parasitism, as well as personal characteristics - lack of initiative, laziness, lack of a “life core”. It turns out that many poor people, from this point of view, are themselves to blame for their poor financial situation. It is possible that when they talk about people who have become drunk or drunk, there is a certain amount of truth here. But is it really the fault of pensioners - doctors, teachers, lecturers who have worked for forty years for the benefit of the Soviet and Russian states - for their miserable situation? It can hardly be said that today’s young and not-so-young professionals are to blame for their situation; they continue to work for very little money in clinics and schools, universities and libraries, museums and theaters, factories and agricultural sector.

However, it should be noted that in recent years, or rather even a decade, the level of well-being of Russians as a whole has increased somewhat. Gradually, “poverty” becomes more characteristic of marginal groups of the population, which is reflected in the general attitude of Russians towards the poor and “poor” fellow citizens. Traditionally, Russian society has been characterized by a sympathetic attitude towards poverty and the poor, as evidenced by numerous popular sayings. A humane attitude towards poverty is characteristic of most literary works; moreover, in some cases poverty is even considered as “ social quality", worthy of respect. Contempt for poverty, the assertion that poor people themselves are to blame for their fate, are more typical of Western culture based on Protestantism. The social doctrine of Protestantism, especially Calvinism, suggests that rich people are more devout Christians than poor people because of their tendency to accumulate, which is a consequence of their asceticism, self-discipline and self-restraint. Poor people pay for their own vices and sins with their poverty. For Russian culture, which was formed on the basis of Orthodoxy, as well as for the cultures of other peoples of Russia professing other traditional confessions for our country, such an attitude towards rich and poor was not considered normal. The poor and “beggars” were helped, and this help was considered a blessing in both Christianity and Islam.

In modern Russia, there is a fairly clear concept of poverty that is justified by the specifics of social reality. In accordance with it, to the poor residents Russian Federation These include those people who have incomes of about 9,000 rubles per capita. Most of the country's citizens earn approximately 40-50% more than this amount. At the same time, the official poverty threshold that the government of the country talks about is “ living wage"- is significantly below the understanding of the majority of Russian citizens about what is considered the poverty line. In fact, if you can hardly live on 9 thousand rubles, then it is almost impossible to live on 5-6 thousand rubles, at least when this money is the income of one person. Of course, in the family the situation changes somewhat and a family of three can hardly survive for a month on about 15-20 thousand rubles. What is considered a sign of poverty in modern Russia? Firstly, this is the poor quality of food, the inability to purchase new and quality clothes, unsatisfactory living conditions. Most of the poor live in communal rooms, dormitories, emergency and dilapidated housing. The poor part of the population is characterized by unequal chances of obtaining a quality education and employment in prestigious fields of activity; it has incomparably lower cultural and social capital. However, as a result of the economic reforms of the 1990s, the Russian Federation experienced massive impoverishment of the population, including representatives of the intelligentsia and skilled workers. People, in their own way professional qualities and skills that, according to the level of education, would be included in the layer of professionals or the basic layer in the West, in Russia found themselves below the poverty line as a result of the collapse of industry and Agriculture, massive and long-term non-payment of wages, sharp inflation. It was as a result of the political and economic vicissitudes that befell Russian society in the 1990s that Russian poverty acquired such diverse shapes. A school teacher, a retired military plant engineer, or a drunkard who has never worked anywhere all his life and drank away his home can be poor.

Stratification of the poor

Like society as a whole, the class of Russian poor is also differentiated. Sociologists identify several main groups classified as poor. First of all, these are the “poor in deprivation.” These include 25% of Russian citizens who, due to insufficient income, cannot fully satisfy their needs for quality housing, education and medical care, leisure, purchasing food and clothing. Another, smaller group makes up about 9% of the Russian population. These include citizens with a very small average per capita income, not exceeding the minimum subsistence level per person established in a particular region. Another 4% of Russian citizens belong to the category of “chronically poor”. As a rule, the chronically poor have been in this social position for at least five years and have long since come to terms with their existence on the periphery of the social hierarchy of Russian society. The majority of the chronically poor cannot fully satisfy their most basic needs - they are forced to not eat enough, dress very poorly, there is no talk of rest, quality medical care, or education at all. The housing conditions of this category of the Russian population are also extremely unsatisfactory. At the same time, the world of the lower social classes is not in all cases identical to the income poor. For example, some representatives of the lumpen population, especially those balancing on the verge of the legality of their earnings, may have very good incomes by average statistical standards, but their tendency towards asocial behavior and a marginal lifestyle does not allow them to constructively manage the funds they receive - as a rule, funds in In this case, they are spent not on medical services, education, or buying furniture, but on alcohol and drugs. It should be noted that many people who are, in fact, not poor, in fact live like poor people precisely because they do not know how to manage their own salaries, suffer from alcohol and drug addiction or gambling addiction, and are infantile in their behavior. financial matters- that is, they themselves reduce their standard of living. In fact, in this case, those who blame the poor for their “troubles” are right, based on the tendency of a significant part of the latter to social vices. However, this concerns, again, primarily the marginal segment of the Russian poor. And even then, mass culture, based on the ideology of consumerism and directing people to maximize the consumption of often unnecessary goods and services, to maintain the illusion of imaginary prosperity, which forces them to take out loans, only aggravates and already unstable financial situation.

Despite the fact that throughout the world the most disadvantaged categories of the population have traditionally been unemployed and non-working people, in modern Russia a very large part of the poor are working citizens. At the same time, the wage level of the working poor may not exceed the subsistence level per capita. Thus, in Russia there are still wages in the amount of 5-6 thousand rubles, and they are paid to workers employed throughout the working day, including those who have a certain qualification. The least paid categories of the working population include nannies and junior kindergarten teachers, librarians, museum workers, and junior medical personnel. Their incomes are much lower than the incomes of the same unskilled workers, cleaners and other persons engaged in heavy and unskilled physical labor. A significant portion of the listed “working poor” simply cannot physically survive without additional earnings or help from other family members - husbands or wives, older relatives or adult children. At the same time, the education and qualifications of many of them does not allow them to be classified among the social lower classes of the country's population, while in terms of income they are on the verge of falling into the social stratum of the poor. Finally, the working poor can also include specialists who are suddenly left without work and subsist on unemployment benefits, which also have very modest amounts in Russia. Finally, the working poor include people who may have good incomes, but whose family members are disabled and forced to share their income among all family members. Thus, having many children in most cases is one of the most important reasons why Russian citizens fall into the category of the poor.

Big role in the formation of social inequality in modern Russia plays, as noted above, regional factor. The bulk of Russia's poor live in rural areas and small "depressive" cities. It was in villages and single-industry towns in the 1990s. the most terrible blow was dealt - enterprises and collective farms were closed, new jobs did not appear, as a result of which an impressive part of the population became unemployed and relatively marginalized. Many villagers live only on the pensions of older relatives and disabled relatives, as well as on odd jobs that are sporadic. In a large city it is much easier to find a job with a salary that allows you to live at least tolerably well. This factor contributes to the gradual emptying of rural areas, as internal migration develops from villages and small towns - to large cities, primarily to the capital of the country, St. Petersburg, the largest commercial and industrial centers, to cities of regional and regional significance. Belonging to the social category of the poor, on the other hand, also affects the opportunity to get a more or less interesting, prestigious or reasonably paid job. A poor person is deprived of the starting resource with which he can begin his labor activity representative of a different social category. For example, a poor person, without owning a car, loses most of his chances of finding a job as a taxi driver. An even greater number of vacancies become unavailable to him in the absence of education, professional qualifications, but a poor person also does not have the opportunity to receive an education, if only because he does not have the resources to ensure his existence while studying. Finally, the social capital of the poor is very limited, since they are increasingly “stuck in their own environment,” which implies a lack of connections among the affluent categories of the population.

Hereditary poverty threatens social order

The transmission of “poverty” by inheritance is becoming an increasingly common phenomenon in modern Russia. Thus, at least half of the total number of modern Russian poor were born and raised in poverty. Accordingly, they most often do not have adequate social capital, cultural capital, or personal qualities and ideological guidelines that could allow them to escape poverty. This category of the population becomes the bearer of a “culture of poverty”, which develops on the periphery of Russian society. On the other hand, the possession of cultural and social capital with a very high degree of probability guarantees a way out of poverty in the event of a sudden situational fall into the stratum of the poor (the latter can happen to non-poor people in the event of ruin own business, dismissal from work, problems with the law, etc.). Most of those previously non-poor people who accidentally fell into a state of poverty, sooner or later again leave the stratum of the poor and move into more prosperous strata of society, which most often is a consequence of the “inclusion” of a number of resources - from their own intellectual and professional potential to the use of social connections.

At the same time, it would be wrong to assess the real standard of living of the population in Russia, guided only official statistics and materials from sociological research. It should be noted that the standard of living varies not only among different social strata, but also among different age categories of the population. Not only income, but also expenses have an impact on the standard of living. Moreover, lending is widespread in Russian society, as a result of which people who are actually poor can give the impression of more or less prosperous people (a mortgaged apartment, a car on credit, furniture and household appliances purchased on credit, despite the fact that they can pay for loans Almost all the wages are gone, that is, there is no money left to satisfy the simplest needs of life). On the other hand, people can get very small income, but at the same time have solid property. For example, many pensioners of the Soviet generation own apartments, garages, and dachas, the total cost of which can amount to many millions of rubles. However, the received monthly pension of 6-10 thousand automatically allows the pensioner to be classified as a poor part of the population, although his funds in the form of real estate can be very significant. Finally, there is a huge segment of the shadow labor market to consider. Officially, people employed in the shadow sector of the economy are considered not working or unemployed, have no or almost no income, but the real level of their earnings can be quite decent and even very significant. Finally, there is another category of the poor - these are foreign labor (and non-labor) migrants who find themselves on the territory of Russia and work in low-paid jobs, or who lost their jobs due to the economic crisis and were unable to return to their home countries. The appearance of a large number of foreign outcasts poses a particular threat to the country’s security and public order, and not only criminals have appeared among migrants in recent years - due to the cultural specifics, many of them are recruited by radical organizations operating both in Russia and abroad. Considering that control over migrants is not carried out effectively enough, this trend looks very dangerous, especially in light of the current military-political situation in the Middle East or Ukraine.

The presence of a large layer of poor in modern Russia is aggravated by the colossal difference in the standard of living that exists between the bulk of the country’s population and the “super-rich.” About a hundred of the richest families currently control at least 35% of Russia's national wealth. Social polarization of the population in Russia reaches colossal proportions, comparable only to some developing countries. Meanwhile, the presence of such large-scale social inequality poses a direct threat to social stability and political order in the Russian Federation. Since there is a “conservation” of poverty, which is acquiring more and more hereditary, class-based features, sooner or later the phenomenon of “class hatred” will arise, which is still absent among the modern poor, who blame themselves, fate, the current government for their plight, but not at all social system that led to such a level of stratification of society. The Russian poor are generally characterized by political passivity. They are not interested in politics, primarily because they do not believe in the possibility of any real change in their social status, and if their own social status does not change, then there is no point in demanding any political changes in the country. Secondly, the majority of poor Russians are characterized by an increased focus on banal survival, which also does not leave them time and energy for any political or social protest activities.

But at the same time, one cannot deny the fact that with effective influence “from the outside,” the huge masses of the Russian poor can turn into a very explosive contingent. Any anti-state forces interested in undermining the political and social order in the country can take advantage of the social discontent of the Russian poor. Moreover, these forces can raise slogans of social justice, without actually intending to put them into practice. That is, the social inequality inherent in modern Russia can play a very negative role in the fate of the country - at least if the state does not take up the solution to the numerous accumulated social problems of Russian society. It is difficult to disagree with Russian political scientist Alexander Karatkevich, who believes that “exceeding the permissible degree of inequality leads to a large difference in the standard of living of individual status groups in society, which can be regarded as discrimination, infringement of certain groups of the population. This circumstance often leads to the emergence of social tension in society and serves as fertile ground for the emergence, development and spread of social conflicts. Therefore, every society must develop a system of regulators to reduce the degree of social inequality” (Karatkevich A.G. Social inequality as a threat to political stability and security of society // PolitBook, No. 4, 2014).

Is it possible to change the existing social stratification due to public policy aimed at reducing social inequality? Undoubtedly. This is evidenced by the experience of a number of European countries, in which at the beginning of the twentieth century the level of social inequality far exceeded Russian indicators, but by the end of the twentieth century the distance between the richest and poorest citizens had decreased many times over. But solving the problem of social inequality will require appropriate efforts from the leadership of the Russian state. Whether the current political elite will be able to sacrifice their individual financial interests and put the interests of Russia, its stability and development, above their own, or whether they will not be able to - the reduction of social polarization of Russian society primarily depends on this.

Photo materials used: http://nnm.me/blogs, pro100news.info.

Ctrl Enter

Noticed osh Y bku Select text and click Ctrl+Enter

Even a superficial look at the people around us gives reason to talk about their dissimilarity. People differ in gender, age, height, level of intelligence and many other characteristics. Such differences between people, due to their physiological and psychological characteristics, are called natural. Natural Differences Far from being harmless, they can become the basis for the manifestation of unequal relations between individuals. The strong force the weak, the cunning prevail over the simpletons. Inequality arising from natural differences is the first form of inequality.

However, the main feature of human society is social inequality, which is inextricably linked with social differences.

Social differences are those that are generated social factors : division of labor (knowledge workers and physical labor), way of life (urban and rural population), social roles (father, doctor, politician), etc. We know that society consists of many social groups, but it also hierarchized: in it, some layers always have more power, greater wealth, and have a number of obvious advantages and privileges compared to others.

Inequality has many faces and manifests itself in various parts of a single social organism: in the family, in institutions, in enterprises, in small and large social groups. It is a necessary condition organization of social life. And inequality is the criterion by which we can place some groups above or below others.

It is intended to identify the basic principles of the hierarchical structure of society social stratification theory. The term stratification comes from the Latin stratum - layer, layer and facere - to do, i.e. The etymology of the word contains the task not only of identifying the diversity of social strata, but of determining the vertical sequence of their position, their hierarchy. Social stratification explains social stratification on the poor, the wealthy and the rich.

Social stratification is a set of social layers arranged in a vertical order. A layered, multi-level society in this case can be compared to geological layers of soil. But at the same time, in comparison with simple stratification, social stratification has significant differences. Firstly, stratification is a stratification when the higher strata are in a more privileged position than the lower ones. Secondly, the upper strata are significantly smaller in the number of members of society included in them.

Social stratification can be carried out according to various indicators, but most often today they include income level, professional prestige, level of education and attitude to political power. In accordance with these criteria, an infinite number of strata of the population could be distinguished in society, but usually the highest, middle and lower strata are distinguished.

Social strata in general, they are relatively stable, but migration of individuals cannot be ruled out. We will consider these movements, while maintaining the stratification structure itself, as social mobility. Social mobility(from the Latin mobilis - mobile) is the movement of an individual or group from one social layer to another, a change in the place of a particular social subject in the social structure. Social mobility is divided into group and individual, as well as horizontal and vertical.

Horizontal mobility involves the movement of people from one social group to another located at the same level.

Vertical mobility implies movement from one stratum to another. Depending on the direction of movement, there are upward mobility(social rise, upward movement) and downward mobility(social descent, downward movement).

There are both horizontal and vertical mobility individual when movement occurs in a person independently of others, and group when movement occurs collectively.

An example of horizontal individual mobility is the movement of a person from a village to a city, from one family (parental) to another (one’s own, newly formed). An example of individual upward mobility is promotion, and downward mobility is dismissal or demotion.

An example of horizontal group mobility is the movement of peasants to the city during industrialization, when industrial workers are needed. And vertical group mobility occurs after a social revolution, when the old class cedes its dominant position to the new class.

INTRODUCTION

Among the most important theoretical problems Sociology can highlight the problem of social inequality. Social inequality has existed throughout human history.

All developed societies are characterized by unequal distribution of material and spiritual benefits, rewards and opportunities. Social inequality can be generated by people belonging to certain social, professional and socio-demographic groups. Even natural genetic or physical differences between people can cause unequal relationships.

In all centuries, many scientists have thought about the nature of relations between people, about the plight of most people, about the problem of the oppressed and the oppressors, about the justice or injustice of inequality. Even the ancient philosopher Plato reflected on the stratification of people into rich and poor. He believed that the state was, as it were, two states. One is made up of the poor, the other is made up of the rich, and they all live together, plotting all sorts of intrigues against each other. In such a society, people are haunted by fear and uncertainty. A healthy society should be different.

1. Social inequality

Social inequality is a form of social differentiation in which individuals, social groups, layers, classes are at different levels of the vertical social hierarchy and have unequal life chances and opportunities to meet needs.

In the very general view inequality means that people live in conditions in which they have unequal access to limited resources for material and spiritual consumption.

Fulfilling qualitatively unequal working conditions and satisfying social needs to varying degrees, people sometimes find themselves engaged in economically heterogeneous labor, because these types of labor have different assessments of their social usefulness. Considering the dissatisfaction of society members existing system distribution of power, property and conditions individual development, we still need to keep in mind the universality of human inequality.

The main mechanisms of social inequality are relations of property, power (dominance and subordination), social (i.e. socially assigned and hierarchized) division of labor, as well as uncontrolled, spontaneous social differentiation. These mechanisms are mainly related to the characteristics market economy, with inevitable competition (including in the labor market) and unemployment. Social inequality is perceived and experienced by many people (primarily the unemployed, economic migrants, those who find themselves at or below the poverty line) as a manifestation of injustice. Social inequality and wealth stratification in society, as a rule, lead to increased social tension, especially during the transition period. This is precisely what is typical for Russia at present.

2.The essence of social inequality

The essence of social inequality lies in the unequal access of different categories of the population to socially significant benefits, scarce resources, and liquid values. The essence of economic inequality is that a minority of the population always owns the majority of national wealth. In other words, the highest incomes are received by the smallest part of society, and the average and lowest incomes are received by the majority of the population.

Inequality characterizes society as a whole, poverty characterizes only part of the population. Depending on the level economic development countries, poverty affects a significant or insignificant part of the population.

To measure the scale of poverty, sociologists identify specific gravity that portion of a country's population (usually expressed as a percentage) that lives below the official poverty line, or threshold. The terms “poverty level”, “poverty lines” and “poverty ratio” are also used to indicate the scale of poverty.

The poverty threshold is an amount of money (usually expressed, for example, in dollars or rubles) officially established as the minimum income that is enough for an individual or family to purchase food, clothing and housing. It is also called the "poverty level". In Russia, it received an additional name - the living wage.

In sociology, a distinction is made between absolute and relative poverty.

Absolute poverty is understood as a condition in which an individual, with his income, is unable to satisfy even the basic needs for food, housing, clothing, warmth, or is able to satisfy only the minimum needs that ensure biological survival. The numerical criterion here is the poverty threshold (subsistence level).

Relative poverty refers to the inability to maintain a decent standard of living, or some standard of living accepted in a given society. Typically, relative poverty is less than half the average household income in a given country. Relative poverty measures how poor a particular individual or family is compared to other people. She happens to be comparative characteristics according to two parameters. Firstly, it shows that a person (family) is poor relative to the abundance or prosperity that other members of society who are not considered poor have. The first meaning of relative poverty is the comparison of one stratum with other strata, or strata. Secondly, it shows that a person (family) is poor relative to some standard of life, for example the standard of a decent or decent life.

The lower limit of relative poverty is the subsistence minimum or poverty threshold, and the upper limit is the so-called decent standard of living. A decent standard of living reflects the amount of material wealth that allows a person to satisfy all reasonable needs, lead a fairly comfortable lifestyle, and not feel disadvantaged.

There is simply no universal level of decent or “normal” life for all strata and social groups. For each class and category of the population it is different, and the spread of values ​​is very significant.

3. Causes of social inequality

Functionalism explains inequality based on the differentiation of social functions performed by different strata, classes, and communities. The functioning and development of society are possible only thanks to the division of labor, when each social group solves the corresponding tasks that are vital for the entire integrity: some are engaged in the production of material goods, others create spiritual values, others manage, etc. For the normal functioning of society, an optimal combination of all is necessary types of human activity. Some of them are more important, others less. Thus, on the basis of the hierarchy of social functions, a corresponding hierarchy of classes and layers that perform them is formed. Those who exercise general leadership and management of the country are invariably placed at the top of the social ladder, because only they can support and ensure the unity of society and create the necessary conditions for the successful performance of other functions.

Observations of the actions and behavior of specific individuals gave impetus to the development of a status explanation of social inequality. Each person, occupying a certain place in society, acquires his own status. Social inequality is inequality of status arising both from the ability of individuals to perform a particular social role (for example, to be competent to manage, to have the appropriate knowledge and skills to be a doctor, lawyer, etc.), and from the opportunities allowing a person to achieve one or another position in society (ownership of property, capital, origin, belonging to influential political forces).

Let's consider an economic view of the problem. In accordance with this point of view, the root cause of social inequality lies in unequal treatment of property and distribution of material goods. This approach was most clearly manifested in Marxism. According to his version, it was the emergence of private property that led to the social stratification of society and the formation of antagonistic classes. The exaggeration of the role of private property in the social stratification of society led Marx and his followers to the conclusion that it was possible to eliminate social inequality by establishing public ownership of the means of production.

The lack of a unified approach to explaining the origins of social inequality is due to the fact that it is always perceived at at least two levels. Firstly, as a property of society. Written history does not know societies without social inequality. The struggle of people, parties, groups, classes is a struggle for the possession of greater social opportunities, advantages and privileges. If inequality is an inherent property of society, therefore, it carries a positive functional load. Society reproduces inequality because it needs it as a source of life support and development.

Secondly, inequality is always perceived as unequal relations between people and groups. Therefore, it becomes natural to strive to find the origins of this unequal position in the characteristics of a person’s position in society: in the possession of property, power, in the personal qualities of individuals. This approach is now widespread.

Inequality has many faces and manifests itself in various parts of a single social organism: in the family, in an institution, in an enterprise, in small and large social groups.

It is a necessary condition for the organization of social life. Parents, having an advantage in experience, skills, and disposal financial means Compared to their young children, they have the opportunity to influence the latter, facilitating their socialization. The functioning of any enterprise is carried out on the basis of the division of labor into managerial and subordinate-executive. The appearance of a leader in a team helps to unite it and transform it into a stable entity, but at the same time it is accompanied by the granting of special rights to the leader.

4.Types of social inequality

The reasons for the first inequality include belonging to a particular race, nationality, a certain height, fatness or thinness of the body, hair color, and even blood type. Very often the distribution of social benefits in society depends on some physical characteristic. Inequality is especially pronounced if the carrier of the trait is part of a “minority group.” Very often a minority group is discriminated against.

Social inequality - what it is, how it is expressed, the main problems in the world

One type of this inequality is “racism”. Some sociologists believe that economic competition is the cause of ethnic inequality. Proponents of this approach emphasize the role of competition between groups of workers for scarce jobs. People with jobs (especially those in lower positions) feel threatened by job seekers. When the latter are members of ethnic groups, hostility may arise or intensify. Also, one of the reasons for the inequality of ethnic inequality can be considered personal qualities an individual, exhibiting which he considers another race inferior.

Sexual inequality is caused mainly by gender roles and sex roles. Basically, gender differences lead to inequality in the economic environment. Women have much less chance in life to participate in the distribution of social benefits: from Ancient India, in which girls were simply killed, to modern society, in which it is difficult for women to find work.

This is connected, first of all, with sexual roles - a man’s place at work, a woman’s place at home.

V) Inequality of prestige

VI) Cultural-symbolic inequality.

3.1.Social classes

Despite the fact that social class is one of the central concepts in sociology, scientists still do not have a common point of view regarding the content of this concept. For the first time we find a detailed picture of class society in the works of K. Marx. We can say that social classes in Marx are economically determined and genetically conflicting groups. The basis for division into groups is the presence or absence of property. The feudal lord and the serf in a feudal society, the bourgeois and the proletarian in a capitalist society are antagonistic classes that inevitably appear in any society that has a complex hierarchical structure based on inequality

Despite the revision, from the point of view of modern society, of many provisions of the class theory of K. Max, some of his ideas remain relevant in relation to currently existing social structures. This primarily applies to situations of inter-class conflicts, clashes and class struggle to change the conditions for the distribution of resources. In this regard, Marx's teaching on the class struggle currently has a large number of followers among sociologists and political scientists in many countries of the world.

Pages:12next →

We can identify inequality based on a number of characteristics:
I) Inequality based on physical characteristics, which can be divided into three types of inequalities: 1) Inequality based on physical differences; 2) Sexual inequality; 3) Inequality by age;
The reasons for the first inequality include belonging to a particular race, nationality, a certain height, fatness or thinness of the body, hair color, and even blood type. Very often the distribution of social benefits in society depends on some physical characteristic. Inequality is especially pronounced if the carrier of the trait is part of a “minority group.” Very often a minority group is discriminated against. One type of this inequality is “racism”. Some sociologists believe that economic competition is the cause of ethnic inequality. Proponents of this approach emphasize the role of competition between groups of workers for scarce jobs. People with jobs (especially those in lower positions) feel threatened by job seekers. When the latter are members of ethnic groups, hostility may arise or intensify. Also, one of the reasons for the inequality of ethnic inequality can be considered the personal qualities of an individual, demonstrating which he considers another race inferior.
Sexual inequality is caused mainly by gender roles and sex roles. Basically, gender differences lead to inequality in the economic environment. Women have much less chance in life to participate in the distribution of social benefits: from Ancient India, in which girls were simply killed, to modern society, in which it is difficult for women to find work. This is connected, first of all, with sexual roles - a man’s place at work, a woman’s place at home.
The type of inequality associated with age mainly manifests itself in the different life chances of different age groups. Basically, it manifests itself at young and retirement age. Age inequality always affects us all.
II) Inequality due to differences in prescribed statuses
Prescribed (ascriptive) status includes inherited factors: race, nationality, age, gender, place of birth, residence, marital status, some aspects of the parents. Very often, a person’s prescribed statuses interfere with a person’s vertical mobility, due to discrimination in society. This type of inequality includes a large number of aspects, and therefore very often leads to social inequality.
III) Inequality based on wealth ownership
IV) Inequality based on power
V) Inequality of prestige
These criteria of inequality were considered in the last century, and will be considered in our work in the future.
VI) Cultural-symbolic inequality
The last type of criterion can be partially attributed to the division of labor, since qualification includes a certain type of education.
Each class has its own specific characteristic, for example, upper class wealth is inherent, but at the same time, financial resources are constantly available to all layers of society, and therefore the concept of “income” can be used to measure the amount of money supply. Income is considered to be the amount of treasury notes received in various types and varieties. For example, wages are typical only for certain segments of the population, which are called wages. labor force. People who have excess income, in other words, rich people, do not belong to them. In addition to these layers, there are also self-employed people who perform the same amount of work as other people, but receive all their income personally, in other words, they work for themselves. People far below the poverty line are not included in the classes and are called the underclass. that is, standing below everyone else.
The essence of inequality lies in the fact that there are national wealth, access to which is available to a perfect minority, which receives the majority of the income.

3. Types of stratification systems

There are many stratification criteria by which any society can be divided. Each of them is associated with special ways of determining and reproducing social inequality. Radaev V.V. offers nine types of stratification systems that can be used to describe any social organism, namely: physical-genetic; social and professional; slaveholding; class; caste; cultural-symbolic; class; cultural-normative, ethacratic.
The basis of the first type - the physical-genetic stratification system - is the differentiation of social groups according to “natural” socio-demographic characteristics. Here, the attitude towards a person or group is determined by gender, age and the presence of certain physical qualities - strength, beauty, dexterity. The greatest prestige here belongs to the one who is able to carry out violence against nature and people or resist such violence: a healthy young male breadwinner in a peasant community living on the fruits of primitive manual labor; courageous warrior of the Spartan state; a true Aryan of the National Socialist army, capable of producing healthy offspring.

The system that ranks people according to their capacity for physical violence is largely a product of the militarism of ancient and modern societies.

Social inequality.

Currently, although deprived of its former meaning, it is still supported by military, sports and sexual-erotic propaganda.
The second stratification system - the slave system - is also based on direct violence. But inequality here is determined not by physical, but by military-legal coercion. Social groups differ in the presence or absence of civil rights and property rights. Certain social groups are completely deprived of these rights and, moreover, along with things, they are turned into an object of private property. Moreover, this position is most often inherited and thus consolidated through generations. Examples of slave systems are very diverse. This is ancient slavery, where the number of slaves sometimes exceeded the number of free citizens, and servility in Rus' during the “Russian Truth”, this is plantation slavery in the south of the United States of America before civil war 1861-1865, this is finally the work of prisoners of war and deportees on German private farms during the Second World War.

Download the essay “Social inequality” DOC

Most societies are organized in such a way that their institutions distribute benefits and responsibilities unequally among different categories of people and social groups. Sociologists call social stratification the arrangement of individuals and groups from top to bottom along horizontal layers, or strata, based on inequality in income, level of education, amount of power, and professional prestige. From this point of view social order is not neutral, but serves the goals and interests of some people and social groups to a greater extent than others.

Social stratification is based on social differentiation, but is not identical to it. Social differentiation– it is the process of the emergence of functionally specialized institutions and division of labor.

Even at the dawn of their history, people discovered that the division of functions and labor increases the efficiency of society, therefore, in all societies there is a separation of statuses and roles. At the same time, members of society must be distributed within the social structure in such a way that various statuses are filled and the roles corresponding to them are fulfilled.

Although the statuses that make up a social structure may differ, they do not necessarily have to occupy a specific place in relation to each other. For example, the statuses of an infant and a child are differentiated, but one of them is not considered superior to the other - they are simply different. Social differentiation provides social material that may or may not become the basis of social gradation. In other words, social differentiation is found in social stratification, but not vice versa.

So, social differentiation– differences between individuals and groups, identified by a number of characteristics.

Basic:

Additional signs:

Why does social inequality exist in society?

Sex and age characteristics affecting social status.

2. Ethno-national characteristics.

3. Religious affiliation.

4. Cultural and ideological positions.

5. Family ties.

Signs that determine the consumption of goods and lifestyle:

1. Area of ​​residence (size and type of dwelling)

2. Recreation facilities, quality of medical care

3. Consumption of cultural goods (volume and nature of education received, volume and nature of information received and cultural products consumed).

Social characteristics in every society are arranged in a certain hierarchy.

Equality has three meanings: 1) equality before the law, legal (formal) equality - expressed in the equality of all citizens before the law (this is a relatively new understanding of equality that appeared in Western Europe in the 17th-18th centuries); 2) equality of opportunity - everyone has the same chance to achieve in life everything that they deserve thanks to their merits and abilities (there is a problem with this social mobility, unfulfilled desires, an unfortunate combination of circumstances that prevented one from realizing oneself, underestimation of merits and lack of recognition, unequal start in life); 3) equality of results - everyone should have the same starting opportunities, regardless of talent, effort and ability (the ideal embodiment of such equality is socialism).

The three concepts of equality are not entirely compatible. F. Hayek believed that the combination of equality of opportunity and equality of results destroys equality before the law. This happens because in order to achieve equality of results it is necessary to violate the principle of equality of all before the law and apply different rules in relation to ordinary people and those in power. Violation of equality before the law does not necessarily occur due to malicious intent. For example, pensioners, disabled people and women have unequal opportunities and ability to work; if they are not given privileges, their standard of living will sharply decrease . F. Hayek believed: inequality is a necessary price for material well-being in a market society.

All societies, with the exception of the simplest hunter-gatherers, are characterized by all three types of inequality identified by M. Weber in the understanding of power: inequality of remuneration, inequality of status, inequality of access to political power.

12Next ⇒

Social inequality appeared in primitive tribes and intensified in subsequent stages of social development.

In modern society, there are large social groups that differ in income (wealth), level of education, profession and nature of work. They are called classes, social strata.

There is a social division in society into groups of the rich (upper class), wealthy (middle class), and poor (lower class).

The rich, upper class includes those who own a lot of property and money. They are on the top rung of the social “ladder” and receive big income, have large property ( oil companies, commercial banks, etc.). A person can become rich thanks to talent and hard work, receiving an inheritance, or a successful career.

Between the rich and the poor there is a middle class of wealthy, wealthy people in cash. They maintain a decent standard of living that allows them to satisfy all reasonable needs (acquire quality products food, expensive clothes, housing).

The poor - the lower class - receive a minimum income in the form of wages, pensions, scholarships, and social benefits. With this money you can purchase only the smallest amount of essentials necessary to maintain human health and life (food, clothing, etc.).

Let's imagine that all people are socially equal. Universal equality deprives people of incentives to move forward, the desire to exert maximum effort and ability to perform duties (people will believe that they get no more for their work than they would get if they did nothing all day).

Inequality between people exists in any society. This is quite natural and logical, given that people differ in their abilities, interests, life preferences, value orientations, etc.

In every society there are poor and rich, educated and uneducated, enterprising and non-entrepreneurial, those with power and those without it.

In this regard, the problem of the origin of social inequality, attitudes towards it and ways to eliminate it has always aroused increased interest, not only among thinkers and politicians, but also among ordinary people who view social inequality as injustice.

In the history of social thought, inequality of people has been explained in different ways: by the original inequality of souls, by divine providence, by imperfection human nature, a functional necessity analogous to an organism.

The German economist K. Marx associated social inequality with the emergence of private property and the struggle of interests of various classes and social groups.

The German sociologist R. Dahrendorf also believed that economic and status inequality, which underlies the ongoing conflict of groups and classes and the struggle for the redistribution of power and status, is formed as a result of the action of the market mechanism for regulating supply and demand.

Russian-American sociologist P. Sorokin explained the inevitability of social inequality the following factors: internal biopsychic differences between people; environment(natural and social), objectively placing individuals in an unequal position; the joint collective life of individuals, which requires the organization of relationships and behavior, which leads to the stratification of society into the governed and the managers.

American sociologist T. Pierson explained the existence of social inequality in every society by the presence of a hierarchical system of values. For example, in American society, success in business and career is considered the main social value, therefore scientists have a higher status and income technological specialties, directors of factories, etc., while in Europe the dominant value is the “preservation of cultural patterns”, in connection with which society gives special prestige to intellectuals in the humanities, clergy, and university professors.

Social inequality, being inevitable and necessary, manifests itself in all societies at all stages of historical development; Only the forms and degrees of social inequality change historically. Otherwise, individuals would lose the incentive to engage in complex and labor-intensive, dangerous or uninteresting activities and improve their skills. With the help of inequality in income and prestige, society encourages individuals to engage in necessary but difficult and unpleasant professions, rewards the more educated and talented, etc.

The problem of social inequality is one of the most acute and pressing in modern Russia. A feature of the social structure of Russian society is strong social polarization - the division of the population into poor and rich in the absence of a significant middle layer, which serves as the basis of an economically stable and developed state. The strong social stratification characteristic of modern Russian society reproduces a system of inequality and injustice, in which the opportunities for independent life self-realization and improvement social status limited for a fairly large part of the Russian population.