IAS GURUKUL

SOCIOLOGY PAPER – 1

BOOK- 2

www.iasgurukul.com
 CONTENTS
TOPIC PAGE NO.

UNIT V: SOCIAL STRATIFICATION & MOBILITY

Social Stratification 1
Basic concepts related to Social Stratification 1
Theories of Social Stratification 9
Structural Functionalist Theory 9
Marxian Theory 12
Weberian Theory 14
Dimensions of Social Stratification 16
Class 16
Status 18
Gender 19
Race 21
Ethnicity 22
Social Mobility 24

UNIT VI: WORK AND ECONOMIC LIFE

Social organization of work in different types of society 31
Formal and informal organization of work 35
Labour and Society 39

UNIT VII: POLITICS AND SOCIETY

Sociological theories of Power 42
Functionalist Theory 42
Marxist Theory 43
Elite theories 45
Pluralism 49
Bureaucracy 50
Pressure groups 52
Political parties 55
Nation 58
State 60
Citizenship 63
Democracy 65
Civil Society 68
Ideology 71
Collective Action 74
Protests 75
Agitation 76
Revolution 76
Social Movements 78
 UNIT VIII: RELIGION AND SOCIETY
Sociological Theories of Religion 84
Marxist Theory of Religion 84
Functionalist Theory of Religion 86
Weberian view of Religion 90
Types of religious practices 92
Sociological classifications of religious movements
Religion in modern society 97
Religion and Science 98
Secularization 99
Fundamentalism 100
Revivalism 102
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Social Stratification and Mobility

Stratification
Social stratification is the allocation of individuals and groups according to various
social hierarchies of differing power, status, or prestige. The divisions are largely
based on socioeconomic inequalities often based on gender, religion, or race and
ethnicity. Social stratification is found in every society, even if it takes on slightly
different forms. It is defined by Ogburn and Nimkoff as ‗The process by which
individuals and groups are ranked in more or less enduring hierarchy of status is
known as stratification.’

Sociologists use the term social inequality to describe the unequal distribution of
valued resources, rewards, and positions in a society. Key to the concept is the notion
of social differentiation. Social characteristics—differences, identities, and roles—
are used to differentiate people and divide them into different categories, which have
implications for social inequality. Social differentiation by itself does not necessarily
imply a division of individuals into a hierarchy of rank, privilege, and power.
However, when a social category like class, occupation, gender, or race puts people in
a position in which they can claim a greater share of resources or services, then social
differentiation becomes the basis of social inequality. The term social stratification
refers to an institutionalized system of social inequality. It refers to a situation in
which the divisions and relationships of social inequality have solidified into a system
that determines who gets what, when, and why.

Society‘s layers are made of people, and society‘s resources are distributed unevenly
throughout the layers. The people who have more resources represent the top layer of
the social structure of stratification. Other groups of people, with progressively fewer
and fewer resources, represent the lower layers of our society. Social stratification
assigns people to socioeconomic strata based on factors like wealth, income, race,
education, and power. The question for sociologists is how systems of stratification
come to be formed. What is the basis of systematic social inequality in society?

Basic concepts related to Social Stratification

1. Equality
―Unstratified society with real equality of its members is a myth that has never been
realized in the history of mankind.‖ – P.A. Sorokin

Equality as a value and a concept is of recent origin, making an appearance during the
post-Renaissance and Enlightenment period. Equality is a modern value. It is also
used as a measure of modernity and of the whole process of modernization. Equality
is associated with the development of the nation state, political egalitarianism and
social justice.

1
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Since time immemorial, men have dreamt of an egalitarian society

Equality denotes the relation between the objects that are compared. Every
comparison presumes a concrete attribute defining the respect in which the equality
applies—equality thus referring to a common sharing of this comparison-determining
attribute. Various different standards might be used to measure inequality, with the
respect in which people are compared remaining constant.

For this reason, it helps to think of the idea of equality or for that matter inequality,
understood as an issue of social justice, not as a single principle, but as a complex
group of principles forming the basic core of today‘s egalitarianism. Depending on
which procedural principle one adopts, contrary answers are forthcoming. Both
equality and inequality are complex and multifaceted concepts. In any real historical
context, it is clear that no single notion of equality can sweep the field.

Equality of opportunity means that everyone has the same starting point, or equal life
chances. Equality of opportunity concept developed in response to the inadequacies of
formal equality. UPSC has set Graduation as the minimum eligibility criterion for the
candidates belonging to different castes, class or religion to complete in the Civil
Services Examination conducted annually.

Equality of outcome refers to an equal distribution of rewards. It is usually reflected in

social equality, an equal distribution of income, wealth and other social goods. Marx‘s
dream of communist society was largely based upon this form of equality

2. Inequality
The problem of equality and inequality is central to both sociology and political
philosophy. In sociology, the study of the causes and consequences of inequality in its
various forms – class, race, gender, power, status, knowledge, wealth, income – is one

2
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

of the most pervasive themes of the discipline.

Inequality is prevalent in almost all known societies

Human societies vary in the extent to which social groups as well as individuals have
unequal access to advantages. Rousseau had made a distinction between natural and
social inequality. The former emerge from the unequal division of physical and mental
abilities among the members of a society. The latter arise from the social entitlement
of people to wealth or economic resources, political power and status regardless of
potential abilities possessed by individuals. Not only economic resources of societies
vary according to the level of development and structural features of society, but also
different groups tend to have differential access to these resources. Hierarchy,
stratification, class-divisions are notions used by anthropologists, sociologists and
political scientists to describe and denote social-inequality. Conventions, rules,
customs and laws confer greater prestige and status on certain groups and occupations
in most human societies.

3. Hierarchy
The term ‗hierarchy' is used for ordering of social units as superior and inferior or
higher and lower. Race and caste are considered as natural hierarchies as both imply
an ordering of endogamous groups having an unchanging hereditary membership.
Hierarchy as a principle of ranking or ordering signifies for more rigidity compared to
the terms like stratification, differentiation, class and power. Louis Dumont gave the
concept of hierarchy while explaining India‘s caste as a rigid and static system of
stratification in his famous work Homo Hierarchicus. It is important to note here that
equality of opportunity is a political ideal that is opposed to caste hierarchy but not to
hierarchy per se. Hierarchy in itself may either be ascribed (ritualistic, based on birth)
or achieved (secular, based on merit).

Inequalities lead to stratification and stratification leads to hierarchy. When

3
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

inequalities are arranged in an order, hierarchy is formed. Hierarchy denotes presence

of multiple strata in society placed one above the other. Hierarchies can be present in
many forms like caste hierarchy, class hierarchy, gender hierarchy and political
hierarchy. More extensive the hierarchy, higher is the differentiation in the society.
According to the functionalist scholar‘s hierarchy is also a symbol of rising
specialization and differentiation in the society. Post modernists say that western
societies have a continuum of individualized inequalities and hence infinite strata and
numerous hierarchies.
Hierarchy can be interpreted as the opposite of equality. Most modern democratic
societies provide for equality of opportunity and hierarchy based on status is
disapproved off. Rule of law and equality of law have given equal status to everyone.
Modern democracies have facilitated equality in the political sphere but inequalities in
social and economic sphere still exist. Hierarchy also results into unequal
opportunities and unequal rewards. Unequal rewards further reinforce hierarchy.
According to Marxist scholars this hierarchy is a design of the dominant classes.
Hierarchy promotes conflict whereas functionalists argue that hierarchy is a symbol of
division of labor in the society and is necessary for working of the social system.
4. Exclusion
Social exclusion is a concept used in many parts of the world to characterize forms of
social disadvantage. It refers to processes through which individuals and entire
communities of people are systematically blocked from rights, opportunities, and
resources that are normally available to members of society and that are key to social
integration. These include housing, employment, healthcare, civic engagement,
democratic participation, and legal due process.

Poverty is a distributional outcome, whereas exclusion can be defined as process of

declining participation, solidarity, and access. It is quite difficult to measure social
exclusion quantitatively, as social exclusion is relative, sensitive, and variable.

The causes of social exclusion vary but there are general causes that social scientists
have identified. In modern industrialized societies, paid work is not only the principal
source of income with which to buy goods and services, but is also the fount of
individuals‘ identity and feelings of self-worth. Therefore, unemployment is
considered a cause of social exclusion. In some circumstances, lack of transportation
can lead to social exclusion. For instance, if lack of access to public transport or a
vehicle prevents a person from getting to a job, training course, job center, school, or
entertainment venue they may be shut out from opportunities.

The problem of social exclusion is usually tied to that of equal opportunity, as some
people are more subject to exclusion than others. Marginalization of certain groups is
a problem even in many economically developed countries, including the United
Kingdom and the United States, where the majority of the population enjoys
considerable economic and social opportunities.

4
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Sociologists see strong links between crime and social exclusion in industrialized
societies including the EU and United States. Growing crime rates may reflect the fact
that an increasing number of people do not feel valued or included in the societies in
which they live. Socially excluded populations may not benefit from the avenues for
income and advancement that are open to others, so they resort to illegal means of
obtaining resources.

5. Poverty
Sociologists generally recognize two definitions of poverty – absolute and relative.
Absolute poverty is grounded in the idea of material subsistence -the basic needs
which must be required in order to sustain a reasonably healthy existence, mainly
food, shelter and clothing. By these standards, there are still hundreds of millions of
people around the world who live in absolute poverty, mostly in Sub-Saharan Africa
and rural India.

However, the problem with the concept of absolute poverty is that there is no
universal definition of it, and definitions of need are culturally variable: for
example,the! Kung bushmen do not regard themselves as living in absolute poverty,
but many people in the West may define them as suffering from this condition.

Poverty is present in developed countries as well. Above, poor people in the USA
Most sociologists today use the concept of relative poverty, which relates poverty to
the standards of living in a particular society. The main reason for using relative
poverty as a measurement is that as societies ‗develop‘, people tend to adjust their
ideas of what counts as a ‗necessity‘ upwards – for example in poor areas of less
developed countries, running water and flush toilets are not generally regarded as
necessities, while in more developed countries refrigerators and telephones may be

5
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

regarded as necessities.
Critics of the relative poverty measurement argue that it detracts our attention away
from the more serious issue of ‗absolute poverty‘, which is potentially life threatening,
whereas those living in relative poverty (in the UK and other developed countries at
least) tend not to be starving.
However, measuring relative poverty is useful as it highlights injustice in society and
groups which experience discrimination and marginalization – women, some ethnic
minorities, the young and the old are more likely to be in relative poverty than other
groups.
Theories of Poverty:
I. The Culture of Poverty: Oscar Lewis, the American anthropologist developed the
concept of ‗culture of poverty‘, which is also called ‗sub-culture of poverty‘ or
‗cultural poverty‘ in 1959 from his field work among the urban poor in Mexico and
Puerto Rico. Lewis argues that the culture of poverty is a ‗design for living‘ which is
transmitted from one generation to the next.

Life style of the poor differs in certain respects from that of other members of society.
At the same time, poverty life styles in different societies share common
characteristics. The circumstances of poverty are similar, in many respects, in
different societies. Similar circumstances and problems tend to produce similar
responses, and these responses can develop into a culture, that is the learned, shared,
and socially transmitted behavior of a social group. This line of reasoning has led to
the concept of a ‗culture of poverty‘ (or a sub-culture of poverty), a relatively distinct
subculture of the poor with its own norms and values.
The culture of poverty is seen as a response by the poor to their position in society.
According to Lewis, it is ―a reaction of the poor to their marginal position in a class-
stratified and highly individualistic society‖.
According to Lewis, the culture of poverty tends to grow and flourish in societies with
the following set of conditions:
i. a cash economy, wage labour and production for profit;
ii. persistently high rate of unemployment and under-employment for unskilled
labour;
iii. low wages;
iv. the failure to provide social, political and economic organization, either on a
voluntary basis or by government imposition, for the low-income population;
v. the existence of a bilateral kinship system rather than a unilateral one;
vi. the existence of a set of values in the dominant class which stresses the
accumulation of wealth and property, the possibility of upward mobility and thrift and
explains the economic status as the result of personal inadequacy or inferiority.

II. Situational Constraints: The theory of culture of poverty has been strongly
contested. Rather than seeing the behaviour of the poor as a response to established
and internalized cultural patterns many researchers view it is as a reaction to

6
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

‗situational constraints‘. In other words, the poor are constrained by the facts of their
situation, by low income, unemployment and the like, to act the way they do, rather
than being directed by a culture of poverty. The situational constraints argument
suggests that the poor would readily change their behaviour in response to a new set
of circumstances once the constraints of poverty were removed.

Situational Constraints argues that the poor share the values of society as a whole, the
only difference being that they are unable to translate many of those values into
reality. Again, argues suggests that once the constraints of poverty are removed, the
poor will have no difficulty adopting mainstream behaviour patterns and seizing
available opportunities.

Ulf Hannerz, a Swedish anthropologist sees situational constraints as more powerful

in directing the behaviour of the poor than cultural patterns. He argues that the cultural
patterns that distinguish the poor exist alongside and are subsidiary to a widespread
commitment to mainstream values.

III. Different Life Situations Theory of Poverty: Poverty is not merely the product
of individual trait or weakness or failure. Rather, it is the result of social forces-classes
and groups and agencies and institutions which operate to reproduce a particular social
order in which some are poor. Social forces produce poverty and therefore in order to
understand the cause of poverty we must understand social forces and how they
operate to produce it.

Keith Joseph calls the ‗family as the cause of poverty‘ as a ‗cycle of deprivation‘ in
which the inadequate parenting, lowered aspirations and disadvantaged environment
of families and communities became internalised as part of the values of some
children as they grew up. Thus, when these children themselves reached adulthood,
their expectations, and their abilities, were lowered and they more readily expected
and accepted, the poverty and deprivation of their parents and acquaintances.
Failure of State in providing social security system leads to poverty. For example,
education, medical care, housing, customs and traditions, criminalization, lack of own
means of production, caste structure actuate poverty.

IV. Marxist Theory of Poverty: According to the Marxist view, the major cause of
poverty is inequality or uneven distribution of wealth and income—a main
consequence of capitalism. Society is being divided into two distinct competitive but
mutually exclusive classes where capitalist class exploits the working class by just
paying for their survival needs. Work becomes just work, workers become an abstract
labour force, and the control over work becomes mainly a management prerogative.

Under capitalism, according to Marx, labour-power becomes a commodity – it is sold

and bought on the market. A worker tries to sell his or her labour-power to an

7
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

employer, in exchange for a wage or salary. If successful (the only alternative being
unemployment), this exchange involves submitting to the authority of the capitalist for
a specific period of time. During that time, the worker does actual labour, producing
goods and services. The capitalist can then sell these and obtain surplus value; since
the wages paid to the workers are lower than the value of the goods or services they
produce for the capitalist. Thus working class are kept poor by the ruling class.

6. Deprivation
Relative deprivation is the experience of being deprived of something to which one
feels to be entitled. It refers to the discontent that people feel when they compare their
positions to those around them and realize that they have less of that which they
believe themselves to be entitled. Social scientists, particularly political scientists and
sociologists, have cited ‗relative deprivation‘ (especially temporal relative
deprivation) as a potential cause of social movements and deviance. In extreme
situations, it can lead to political violence such as rioting, terrorism, civil wars and
other instances of social deviance such as crime.

Some scholars explain the rise of social movements by citing the grievances of people
who feel that they have been deprived of values to which they are entitled. Similarly,
individuals engage in deviant behaviors when their means do not match their goals.

This refers to a theory of social change that attributes drastic events like social and
political revolutions to the desire among a group of people within society to acquire
the privileges that are enjoyed by other privileged groups. In other words, social
change is seen as the result of the feeling of deprivation or other forms of serious
discontent experienced by a group of people. Relative deprivation could be caused by
economic or other social inequalities among various social groups. It is believed that
group members who were earlier dispersed may find common ground in a cause that
leads them to ignore their individual interests and unite under a single cause.

Feelings of deprivation are relative, as they come from a comparison to social norms
that are not absolute and usually differ from time and place. This differentiates relative
deprivation from objective deprivation (also known as absolute deprivation or
absolute poverty), a condition that applies to all underprivileged people. While the
objective deprivation (poverty) in the world may change over time, relative
deprivation will not, as long as social inequality persists and some humans are better
off than others. Relative deprivation may be temporal; that is, it can be experienced by
people that experience expansion of rights or wealth, followed by stagnation or
reversal of those gains.

Some sociologists—for instance, Karl Polanyi—have argued that relative differences

in economic wealth are more important than absolute deprivation, and that this is a
more significant determinate of human quality of life. This debate has important
consequences for social policy, particularly on whether poverty can be eliminated

8
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

simply by raising total wealth or whether egalitarian measures are also needed. A
specific form of relative deprivation is relative poverty. A measure of relative poverty
defines poverty as being below some relative poverty line, such as households who
earn less than 20% of the median income. If everyone‘s real income in an economy
increases, but the income distribution stays the same, the number of people living in
relative poverty will not change.

Critics of this theory have pointed out that this theory fails to explain why some
people who feel discontent fail to take action and join social movements. Counter-
arguments include that some people are prone to conflict-avoidance, are short-term-
oriented, or that imminent life difficulties may arise since there is no guarantee that
life-improvement will result from social action.

Theories of Social Stratification

The Structural Functionalist Theory

Functionalist theory assumes that the various structures and processes in society exist
because they serve important functions for society‘s stability and continuity. In line
with this view, functionalist theorists in sociology assume that stratification exists
because it also serves important functions for society.

Parsons argued the purpose of social stratification is the differential evaluation in the
moral sense of individuals as units. Parsons means, the status or honor is the most
important dimension of social stratification. People are evaluated and ranked by others
in terms of how well they live up to the dominant values in the society, whatever these
values may be. This means that there will always be a hierarchy of status honor in
every society. Parsons recognized wealth and power differences, but primary
significance is a symbol of achievement.

Parsons argued that American society values individual achievement and efficiency,
and 'puts primary emphasis on productive activity within the economy‘. Thus,
successful business executives who have achieved their position through their own
initiative, ability and ambition, and run efficient and productive businesses, will
receive high rewards. Parsons s argument suggests that stratification is an inevitable
part of all human societies. If value consensus is an essential component of all
societies, then it follows that some form of stratification will result from the ranking
of individuals in terms of common values.

Davis and Moore‘s approach of Stratification developed more than six decades ago in
the form of several logical assumptions that imply stratification is both necessary and
inevitable. Davis and Moore posit that a functioning society must somehow distribute
its members in social positions and induce them to perform the duties of these
positions. In order to accomplish this, rewards are attached to positions as

9
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

motivational devices. Rewards must be sufficient both to attract adequate numbers of

individuals to occupy positions and to motivate adequate role performance. It is
hypothesized that differences in rewards are necessary because positions are not
equally agreeable or equally important to the society, nor do they require the same
talent or training.

Differences in wealth and power are good because they motivate all sections of the society.
Above, Donald Trump, whose flamboyant lifestyle inspires many Americans.

In economic terms, agreeability, talent, and training are parameters which affect the
supply of individuals willing and able to participate in particular positions, while
functional importance is similar to demand. Greater disagreeability, required talent, or
training decreases labor supply whereas greater functional importance increases
demand. The balance of supply and demand determines the rewards associated with
each position.

According to them:
a Some jobs are more important than other jobs. For example, the job of a
brain surgeon is more important than the job of shoe-shining.
b Some jobs require more skills and knowledge than other jobs. To stay with
our example, it takes more skills and knowledge to do brain surgery than to
shine shoes.
c Relatively few people have the ability to acquire the skills and knowledge
that are needed to do these important, highly skilled jobs. Most of us would

10
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

be able to do a decent job of shining shoes, but very few of us would be able to
become brain surgeons.
d To induce the people with the skills and knowledge to do the important,
highly skilled jobs, society must promise them higher incomes or other
rewards. If this is true, some people automatically end up higher in society‘s
ranking system than others, and stratification is thus necessary and inevitable.
To illustrate this, say we have a society where shining shoes and doing brain surgery
both give us incomes of Rs. 15,00,000 per year. If you decide to shine shoes, you can
begin making this money at age 16, but if you decide to become a brain surgeon, you
will not start making this same amount until about age 35, as you first must go to
college and medical school and then acquire several more years of medical training.
While you have spent 19 additional years beyond age 16 getting this education and
training and taking out tens of thousands of dollars in student loans, you could have
spent these 19 years shining shoes and making Rs. 15,00,000 a year, or Rs.
2,85,00,000 overall. Which job would you choose?

As this example suggests, many people might not choose to become brain surgeons
unless considerable financial and other rewards awaited them. By extension, we might
not have enough people filling society‘s important jobs unless they know they will be
similarly rewarded. If this is true, we must have stratification. This all sounds very
logical, but a few years after Davis and Moore published their functionalist theory of
stratification, other sociologists pointed out some serious problems in their argument

Melvin Tumin‟s critique of Davis and Moore‟s theory

First, it is difficult to compare the importance of many types of jobs. For example,
which is more important, doing brain surgery or mining coal? Although you might be
tempted to answer ―brain surgery,‖ if no coal were mined, much of our society could
not function. In another example, which job is more important, attorney or professor?
Each and every profession is necessary and important in any given society to exist and
function properly.

Second, the functionalist explanation implies that the most important jobs have the
highest incomes and the least important jobs the lowest incomes, but many examples,
including the ones just mentioned, counter this view. Coal miners make much less
money than physicians, and professors, for better or worse, earn much less on the
average than lawyers. A professional athlete making millions of dollars a year earns
many times the income of the president of the United States, but who is more
important to the nation? Elementary school teachers do a very important job in our
society, but their salaries are much lower than those of sports agents, advertising
executives, and many other people whose jobs are far less essential.

Third, the functionalist view also implies that people move up the economic ladder
based on their abilities, skills, knowledge, and, more generally, their merit. If this is

11
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

true, another implication is that if they do not move up the ladder, they lack the
necessary merit. This view ignores the fact that much of our stratification stems from
lack of equal opportunity, as our Monopoly example at the beginning of the chapter
made clear. Because of their race, ethnicity, gender, and class standing at birth, some
people have less opportunity than others to acquire the skills and training they need to
fill the types of jobs addressed by the functionalist approach.

Finally, the functionalist explanation might make sense up to a point, but it does not
justify the extremes of wealth and poverty found in the United States and other
nations. Even if we do have to promise higher incomes to get enough people to
become physicians, does that mean we also need the amount of poverty we have? Do
CEOs of corporations really need to make millions of dollars per year to get enough
qualified people to become CEOs? Don‘t people take on a CEO job or other high-
paying job at least partly because of the challenge, working conditions, and other
positive aspects they offer? The functionalist view does not answer these questions
adequately.

Criticisms of Functional theory of stratification:

a. Ralf Dahrendorf was also one of the major critics of Functional theory. He observes
that stratification originates from the ‗closely related trinity of norms, sanction and
power‘.
b. Similarly, rigidity of caste system cannot be explained through functional theories
of Davis and Moore and others.
c. Further, ‗elite recruitment‘ theory proves that elite gobble up all the rewards and
perpetuate elite rule.
d. Beck and Baudrillard also visualize that such functional stratification is no longer
valid as inequalities are now individualized and no clear strata exist today.
f. According to Alvin Gouldner, stratification is not inevitable as Davis and Moore
predicted and criticizes them for providing a justification for social inequalities.
g. According to Jonathan Turner, structure functionalist theories suffer from
illegitimate teleologies as a big logical problem. They often take cause and effect and
vice-versa.

Marxian Theory
Conflict theory‘s explanation of stratification draws on Karl Marx‘s view of class
societies and incorporates the critique of the functionalist view just discussed. Many
different explanations grounded in conflict theory exist, but they all assume that
stratification stems from a fundamental conflict between the needs and interests of the
powerful, or ―haves,‖ in society and those of the weak, or ―have-nots‖. The former
take advantage of their position at the top of society to stay at the top, even if it means
oppressing those at the bottom. At a minimum, they can heavily influence the law, the
media, and other institutions in a way that maintains society‘s class structure.

12
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

In Marxist theory, the modern mode of production consists of two main economic
parts: the base and the superstructure. The base encompasses the relations of
production: employer–employee work conditions, the technical division of labour, and
property relations.

Social class, according to Marx, is determined by one's relationship to the means of

production. There exist at least two classes in any class-based society: the owners of
the means of production and those who sell their labor to the owners of the means of
production. At times, Marx almost hints that the ruling classes seem to own the
working class itself as they only have their own labor power ('wage labor') to offer the
more powerful in order to survive. These relations fundamentally determine the ideas
and philosophies of a society and additional classes may form as part of the
superstructure.

Through the ideology of the ruling class— throughout much of history, the land-
owning aristocracy—false consciousness is promoted both through political and non-
political institutions but also through the arts and other elements of culture. When the
aristocracy falls, the bourgeoisie become the owners of the means of production in the
capitalist system. Marx predicted the capitalist mode would eventually give way,
through its own internal conflict, to revolutionary consciousness and the development
of more egalitarian, more communist societies.

Marx also described two other classes, the petite bourgeoisie and the lumpen-
proletariat. The petite bourgeoisie is like a small business class that never really
accumulates enough profit to become part of the bourgeoisie, or even challenge their
status. The lumpen-proletariat is the underclass, those with little to no social status.
This includes prostitutes, beggars, the homeless or other untouchables in a given
society. Neither of these subclasses has much influence in Marx's two major classes,
but it is helpful to know that Marx did recognize differences within the classes.

Marx expanded on these ideas, he still emphasized an economically oriented culture,

with property defining the fundamental relationships between people, issues of
ownership and property are arguably less emphasized in hunter-gatherer societies.
This, combined with the very different social and economic situations of hunter-
gatherers may account for many of the difficulties encountered when implementing
communism in industrialized states.

The counter-argument to Marxist's conflict theory is the theory of structural

functionalism, argued by Kingsley Davis and Wilbert Moore, which states that social
inequality places a vital role in the smooth operation of a society. The Davis–Moore
hypothesis argues that a position does not bring power and prestige because it draws a
high income; rather, it draws a high income because it is functionally important and
the available personnel is for one reason or another scarce. Most high-income jobs are
difficult and require a high level of education to perform, and their compensation is a

13
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

motivator in society for people to strive to achieve more.

Max Weber‟s theory on Stratification

Weber developed a multidimensional approach to social stratification that reflects the

interplay among wealth, prestige and power. Weber argued that power can take a
variety of forms. A person's power can be shown in the social order through their
status, in the economic order through their class, and in the political order through
their party. Thus, class, status and party are each aspects of the distribution of power
within a community.

Class
Class, at its core, is an economic concept; it is the position of individuals in the
market that determines their class position. And it is how one is situated in the
marketplace that directly affects one's life chances. Weber‘s approach is more diverse
than that of Marx, in that Weber considers each of financiers, debtors, professional
groups such as lawyers or doctors, landless, and workers to be classes. That is, for
Weber there are many more possible classes than just capitalists and workers and he
does not consider ownership or non-ownership of the means of production to be the
major source of class formation in capitalism.

Class Situation: Weber begins his analysis by defining class situation as the
relationship of a person or number of people to a particular market that has an
important effect on the lives of these people. The typical chance for a supply of goods,
external living conditions, and personal life experiences, in so far as this chance is
determined by the amount and kind of power, or lack of such, to dispose of goods or
skills for the sake of income in a given economic order. In Weber's terminology, a
person‘s class situation is basically their market situation.

Weber identifies the major social classes as

 The propertied class

 The non-propertied class
 Petty bourgeoisie the classes privileged through property and education.
 The manual labourer class

From this approach, Weber argues that there are three features of class. These are as
follows:
i. Life Chances: A group of people in a similar situation so that they have their life
chances determined more or less in common, by some factor that strongly affects this.
The ownership or non-ownership of property is one factor that affects life chances.
For example, the wealth, income and property of two people may be similar, and this

14
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

tends to imply a similar outcome to their actions. People with the same life chances
may end up in different positions. The meaning each person attaches to these, and the
manner these are used, may differ quite considerably. Weber notes how the power of
those with property, compared to those without property, gives the former great
advantages over the latter. But Weber does not restrict the definition to property in
the means of production though, and argues that it could emerge in the area of
distribution, for example in sales, where owners of different types of sales operations
could form different classes – wholesale, retail, mining, forestry, etc.

ii. Economic Interest: This component is represented exclusively by economic

interests in the possession of goods and opportunities for income.

iii. Markets: This component is represented under conditions of the commodity or

labor markets.

Status
In contrast to classes, status groups are normally communities. In contrast to the
purely economically determined ‗class situation‘, ‗status situation‘ is every typical
component of the life fate of men is determined by a specific, positive or negative,
social estimation of honor. This honor may be connected with any quality shared by a
plurality, and, of course, it can be knit to a class situation: class distinctions are linked
in the most varied ways with status distinctions.

Status group formed on the basis of following characteristics:

a. Property is an important basis for a status group, especially where markets prevail.
Those with considerable property or wealth have the means to develop a certain style
of life, and those without property are not able to exercise this style. Because of this,
or on the basis of property alone, social honour may also be accorded these same
people.
b. Styles of life based on consumption differences commonly form status groups in
the Weberian sense. Property and income are the source of funds required for
consumption. It not so much the source of the income that forms the status group as
the set of objects and services consumed which leads to the social honour associated
with group interaction. Groups may form around residential neighbourhoods,
professions, and educational levels.
c. Groups unrelated to property could also be formed. These could be ethnic
groups, religious groups, groups around sexual orientation, and the various urban
communities and groups which form around common sets of interests. In each, there
is likely to be some social honour accorded members, there is likely to be some
closure of the group, and membership may carry with it certain duties and privileges.
Some of these groups may have effect on life chances, especially where religion or
ethnicity is an important feature of social organization.

15
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Parties
Parties are organizations, rather than communities or groups, and they involve striving
for a goal in a planned manner. They are associations of people that attempt to
influence social action. Since they are concerned with achieving some goal, they are
in the sphere of power in that.

Place of ‗classes‟ is within the economic order, the place of ‗status groups‘ is within
the social order, that is, within the sphere of the distribution of ‗honour.‘ From within
these spheres, classes and status groups influence one another and they influence the
legal order and are in turn influenced by it. But ‗parties‟ live in a hose of ‗power.‘
Their action is oriented toward the acquisition of social ‗power,‘ that is to say, toward
influencing a communal action no matter what its content may be.

Parties also differ from classes or status groups in that they attempt to achieve goals in
a planned manner, and thus are rational. There are various aims, goals, or purposes
that the party attempts to achieve. It considers various possible ways of achieving
these, and selects a course of action that it considers the most likely to achieve that
goal. The structure of the party is also rational in that these actions are not a byproduct
of social interaction, but are carefully considered and selected. The party is likely to
have a constitution, a set of officers, and means of filling these positions with people
most suited for them.

Weber's discussion of class, status and party give an idea of how markets affect
people, and how people form themselves into groups, partly as a result of markets and
partly on the basis of other factors that are socially important. To some extent,
Weber's status groups would appear to be ways in which people in capitalism protect
themselves from the effects of markets, but at the same time using the market as they
can, and using the means of power they have at their disposal.

Dimensions of Social Stratification

Class
Many societies, including all industrial ones, have class systems. In this system of
stratification, a person is born into a social ranking but can move up or down from it
much more easily than in caste systems or slave societies. This movement in either
direction is primarily the result of a person‘s own effort, knowledge, and skills or lack
of them. Although these qualities do not aid upward movement in caste or slave
societies, they often do enable upward movement in class societies. Class systems are
by far the most open, meaning they have the most vertical mobility when compared
with Caste systems.

Weber defines class as – ‗A body of people having identical position in a market

situation‘. He broadly defines class structure in terms of 4 classes –

16
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

a. Propertied upper class

b. White collar workers
c. Petty bourgeoisie
d. Manual laborers

Max Weber wrote class systems are based on three dimensions of stratification: class
(which can be called as wealth), power (party), and prestige (status). Wealth is the
total value of an individual or family, including income, stocks, bonds, real estate, and
other assets; power is the ability to influence others to do your bidding, even if they do
not want to; and prestige refers to the status and esteem people hold in the eyes of
others.

Weber disagreed somewhat with Karl Marx, who said our ranking in society depends
on whether we own the means of production. Marx thus felt that the primary
dimension of stratification in class systems was economic. Weber readily
acknowledged the importance of this economic dimension but thought power and
prestige also matter. He further said that although wealth, power, and prestige usually
go hand-in-hand, they do not always overlap. For example, although the head of a
major corporation has a good deal of wealth, power, and prestige, we can think of
many other people who are high on one dimension but not on the other two. A
professional athlete who makes millions of dollars a year has little power in the
political sense that Weber meant it. An organized crime leader might also be very
wealthy but have little prestige outside the criminal underworld. Conversely, a
scientist or professor may enjoy much prestige but not be very wealthy.

According to Giddens there are three main sources of class power – the possession of
property, qualifications, and physical labor power. These tend to give rise to three-
class structure: a dominant/upper class based on property, an intermediate/middle
class based on credentials, and a working/lower class based on labor power.

Classless Societies
All societies except perhaps for the simplest ones are stratified, some large nations
have done their best to eliminate stratification by developing classless societies. Marx,
of course, predicted that one day the proletariat would rise up and overthrow the
bourgeoisie and create a communist society, by which he meant a classless one in
which everyone had roughly the same amount of wealth, power, and prestige. In
Russia, China, and Cuba, revolutions inspired by Marx‘s vision occurred in the 20th
century. These revolutions resulted in societies not only with less economic inequality
than in the United States and other class systems but also with little or no political
freedom. Moreover, governing elites in these societies enjoyed much more wealth,
power, and prestige than the average citizen. Overall, the communist experiments in
Russia, China, and Cuba failed to achieve Marx‘s vision of an egalitarian society.

17
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Some Western European nations, such as Sweden and Denmark, have developed
social democracies based on fairly socialist economies. Although a few have nominal
monarchies, these nations have much political freedom and less economic inequality
than the United States and other class societies. They also typically rank much higher
than the United States on various social and economic indicators. Although these
nations are not truly classless, they indicate it is possible, if not easy, to have a society
that begins to fulfill Marx‘s egalitarian vision but where political freedom still prevails

Status
Individuals or groups in a society are ranked along several dimensions of social
stratification. Those rankings along several dimensions of social stratification may all
be highly correlated with one another (i.e., all high, all medium or all low in rank) or
much less highly correlated (some high, some medium, and some low in rank). The
former is called an example of status consistency.

That is, the concerned individuals or groups satisfactorily fulfill the requirements of
all the criteria which are taken into account in determining social status. The latter is
an example of status inconsistency, because according to some criteria one may have
a high status, according to some a medium status, and according to some others a low
status. A few simple examples will be illuminating.

If, for example, a high caste Brahmin marries a girl belonging to a comparatively
lower caste, a status inconsistency is the probable outcome. Likewise, the marriage of
the daughter of the nouveaux riches to men of distinguished lineage may give rise to
the problem of status inconsistency. The position of the many high-caste Brahmin
priests with low occupational prestige is another phenomenon of this nature.

A series of analyses and research studies have been undertaken to investigate social
stratification in these-terms. It has been found that status inconsistency results in types
of behaviour different from those caused by status consistency. It has also been found
that each specific pattern of inconsistency has its own specific consequences.

It has also been found that various kinds of status inconsistency may last long enough
and that there is no universal tendency toward status consistency, that is, toward
highly positive correlation among the individual‘s several rankings.

According to Weber, apart from an economic and a political dimension, stratification

also has a purely social indicator - status (or prestige as an assessment given to
different social statuses on the basis of comparison performed by the members of
society). Status is the relative social position of the individual or group in the social
hierarchy, which includes certain rights and obligations. Status also incorporates such
socio-cultural characteristics as the way of life. Stratification by status goes hand in
hand with a monopolization of ideal and material goods or opportunities. Weber

18
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

considers status groups as real communities performing collective action as opposed

to classes.

Weber believes there are two kinds of status - class and social. Class status involves
material possessions or commodities, externally demonstrable living conditions and
the subjective sense of inner gratification. Class statuses differ, depending on the types
of class. For the members of the class of owners, with all its diversity, it is primarily
expressed in the monopoly on acquisition and sales of expensive commodities, the
control over investments and business, the socially prestigious consumption. The class
status of people, who are not owners and who lack professional qualification is of a
single type and is characterized by the absence of freedom for economic activity and a
position of subordination.

Social status is linked to a certain level of social esteem and honors through the
category of ―prestige‖. It is typically expressed and determined by the lifestyle and
thus, by the formal education and the corresponding types of behavior, by the
hereditary and professional attributes. In real life, status according to Weber is
expressed in the marital relations, commensalisms, monopolistic appropriation of the
privileged forms of consumption or the prohibition of certain types of consumption.
Following Weber’s idea, Swedberg specifically notes that as opposed to a class, a
status group is typically related to consumption rather than to production.

Pierre Bourdieu in his ‗An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology, 1992’ also proposed that
lifestyle choices, rather than class, are more important today. Individual identities are
now more shaped by lifestyle choices rather than by more traditional indicators like
occupation. He made a departure from class to status and enumerated four dimensions
of status as – cultural capital, economic capital, social capital and symbolic capital.

Social status is one of the most powerful determinants affecting the actions and
behavior of people. The struggle for status is typical of every individual and social
group.

Gender
Gender is the patterning of difference and domination through distinctions between
women and men. Gender roles are social constructions: they contain self-perceptions
and psychological traits, as well as family, occupational, and political roles assigned
to each sex. Patriarchy is the term for forms of social organization in which men are
dominant over women. Often the terms gender inequality and gender stratification are
used interchangeably.

In the context of gender, conflict theory argues that gender is best understood as men
attempting to maintain power and privilege to the detriment of women. Therefore,
men can be seen as the dominant group and women as the subordinate group. While

19
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

certain gender roles may have been appropriate in a hunter-gatherer society, conflict
theorists argue that the only reason these roles persist is because the dominant group
naturally works to maintain their power and status. According to conflict theory,
social problems are created when dominant groups exploit or oppress subordinate
groups. Therefore, their approach is normative in that it prescribes changes to the
power structure, advocating a balance of power between genders.

Friedrich Engels suggested that the same owner-worker relationship seen in the labor
force could also be seen in the household, with women assuming the role of the
proletariat. This was due to women‘s dependence on men for the attainment of wages.
Contemporary conflict theorists suggest that when women become wage earners, they
gain power in the family structure and create more democratic arrangements in the
home, although they may still carry the majority of the domestic burden.

While nature created sexual difference, gender is a social construct according to

feminist sociologist Ann Oakley. She rejected biological basis as offered by Tiger
and Fox, Parsons etc. According to feminists, women are oppressed as a class by men
and patriarchal structures are geographically and historically almost universal.

The feminist perspective of gender stratification more recently takes into account
intersectionality, a feminist sociological theory first highlighted by feminist-
sociologist Kimberlé Crenshaw. Intersectionality suggests that various biological,
social and cultural categories, including gender, race, class and ethnicity, interact and
contribute towards systematic social inequality. Therefore, various forms of
oppression, such as racism or sexism, do not act independently of one another;
instead, these forms of oppression are interrelated, forming a system of oppression
that reflects the ―intersection‖ of multiple forms of discrimination. In light of this
theory, the oppression and marginalization of women is thus shaped not only by
gender, but by other factors such as race and class.

Symbolic interactionism aims to understand human behavior by analyzing the

critical role of symbols in human interaction. The meanings attached to symbols are
socially created and fluid, instead of natural and static. Because of this, we act and
react to symbols based on their current assigned meanings. Both masculinity and
feminity are performed gender identities, in the sense that gender is something we do
or perform, not something we are.

Charles H. Cooley‟s developed the theory of the ―looking-glass self‖ (1902). In this
theory, Cooley argued that an individual‘s perception of himself or herself is based
primarily how society views him or her. In the context of gender, if society perceives
a man as masculine, that man will consider himself as masculine. Thus, when people
perform tasks or possess characteristics based on the gender role assigned to them,
they are said to be doing gender (rather than ―being‖ gender).

20
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

West & Zimmerman emphasized that gender is maintained through accountability.

Men and women are expected to perform their gender to the point that it is
naturalized, and thus, their status depends on their performance.

Gender stratification has moved beyond conventional male-female debate and

increasing focus on transgender, bisexuals, gays, lesbians is also there. Many
countries have now officially recognized and given legitimacy to such groups. Their
problems are also now becoming part of mainstream stratification debate. Gay Pride,
Gay Liberation Front etc. have highlighted the issue of rights of such groups globally.
Even in India, Supreme Court acknowledged the hardships that these groups faced and
even asked the state to consider them as ‗backward‘ and take affirmative steps for
their upliftment.

Race
Racial and ethnic stratification refers systems of inequality in which some fixed
groups membership, such as race, religion, or national origin is a major criterion for
ranking social positions and their differential rewards. Race is socially defined on the
basis of a presumed common genetic heritage resulting in distinguishing physical
characteristics. Ethnicity refers to the condition of being culturally rather than
physically distinctive. Ethnic peoples are bound together by virtue of common
ancestry and a common cultural background.
Racial stratification is a system of structured inequality, where access to scarce and
desired resources is based on racial group membership. Racial stratification assigns
roles and functions to individuals based on their racial group membership. These
assignments have both physical and social consciousness consequences.

Human population may be classified into different races as above

Joseph Arthur de Gobineau in mid-19th century gave first major racial classification
in terms of three distinct groups – White (Caucasian), Black (Negroid) and Yellow
(‗Mongolian). He also attached notions of superiority and inferiority with these races.
White race was termed as supreme race. Such ideas of scientific racism also

21
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

influenced colonial ruler and they at times tried to justify their colonial sojourns on the
basis of such ideas. White Man‘s Burden theory of Rudyard Kipling was also rooted
in racial notions.

Adolf Hitler too adopted supremacy of Aryan race into a political ideology which led
to annihilation of millions of Jews and the worst global war in the history of mankind.

Racial stratification has affected different societies differently and racism is the worst
form of racial stratification. An extreme example is Apartheid in South Africa which
once segregated whites and blacks in a highly discriminated manner.

India too has witnessed racial stratification in past during Colonial Rule. Criminal
Tribes Act was result of such a skewed racial perception. Developed countries like
USA also suffer from ‗racial profiling‘ incidents.

Ethnicity
An ethnic group (or ethnicity) is a group of people whose members identify with each
other, through a common heritage, often consisting of a common language, a common
culture (often including a shared religion) and/or an ideology that stresses common
ancestry or endogamy.

Nobel Peace Prize in 2018 was

awarded to Yazidi human
rights activist Nadia Murad
(inset). Yazidis are a minority
ethnic group in Iraq who have
faced persecution for
centuries.

According to Eriksen, current sociology is concerned not so much with the definition
of ethnicity but with attempts to respond to increasingly politicised forms of self-
representation by members of different ethnic groups and nations.

Weber maintained that ethnic groups were kunstlich (artificial, i.e. a social construct)
because they were based on a subjective belief in shared Gemeinschaft (community).
Secondly, this belief in shared. Third, group formation resulted from the drive to
monopolise power and status. This was contrary to the prevailing naturalist belief of
the time, which held that socio -cultural and behavioral differences between peoples
stemmed from inherited traits and tendencies derived from common descent, then

22
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

called "race".

Ethnic stratification depends upon the processes under which a society has undergone.
Such process can be – assimilation, melting pot, pluralistic co-existence or
antagonistic co-existence. During process of assimilation, new immigrant groups
adopt the attitudes and culture of the existing dominant group. In melting pot,
different ethnic groups merge together. USA is such an example where many ethnic
identities have merged to a great extent. Example of pluralism would be a society like
India. Antagonistic co-existence is best exemplified which suffer ethnic conflicts.
Such type of societies best demonstrate existence of sharp ethnic lines. Sri Lanka is
such an example where ethnic Tamils and Singhalese exist in form of distinct strata.

Ethnicity and race

In 1950, the UNESCO statement, "The Race Question", signed by some of the
internationally renowned scholars of the time suggested that: "National, religious,
geographic, linguistic and cultural groups do not necessarily coincide with racial
groups: and the cultural traits of such groups have no demonstrated genetic connection
with racial traits. Because serious errors of this kind are habitually committed when
the term 'race' is used in popular parlance, it would be better when speaking of human
races to drop the term 'race' altogether and speak of 'ethnic groups'."

In 1982 anthropologist David Craig Griffith summed up forty years of ethnographic

research, arguing that racial and ethnic categories are symbolic markers for different
ways that people from different parts of the world have been incorporated into a
global economy:

The opposing interests that divide the working classes are further reinforced through
appeals to "racial" and "ethnic" distinctions. Such appeals serve to allocate different
categories of workers to rungs on the scale of labor markets, relegating stigmatized
populations to the lower levels and insulating the higher echelons from competition
from below. Capitalism did not create all the distinctions of ethnicity and race that
function to set off categories of workers from one another. It is, nevertheless, the
process of labor mobilization under capitalism that imparts to these distinctions their
effective values.

According to Wolf, races were constructed and incorporated during the period of
European mercantile expansion, and ethnic groups during the period of capitalist
expansion. Often, ethnicity also connotes shared cultural, linguistic, behavioural or
religious traits. For example, to call oneself Jewish or Arab is to immediately invoke a
clutch of linguistic, religious, cultural and racial features that are held to be common
within each ethnic category.

23
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Social Mobility

All societies that exist in the world are stratified societies, i.e. societies are divided
into different strata or layers. Although the strata in different societies might vary,
every society displays some form of stratification. Hardly would anyone find a society
that is completely egalitarian. Also, it is rare for societies to remain static. Societies
are always dynamic and there is always some movement between the different strata.

Oprah Winfrey, who rose from poverty to become a media mogul, symbolizes social mobility in
contemporary American society

Social mobility in common parlance means movement of individuals or groups from

one stratum/layer to another. According to Oxford Dictionary of Sociology the
movement – usually of individuals but sometimes of whole groups – between different
positions within the system of social stratification in any society is called social
mobility. Thus, social mobility might either refer to individual movement or group
movement within a stratified system.

P.A. Sorokin‟s work on social mobility is quite well known and widely used in
sociology. Sorokin in his famous work Social and Cultural Mobility describes the
concept of social mobility in elaborate detail and its significance. According to him,
―social mobility is understood as any transition of an individual or social object or
value – anything that has been created or modified by human activity – from one
social position to another‖

He was of the opinion that there is no society which is totally closed (even Caste

24
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

System in India) and no society which is completely open (Class System). He further
contended that no two societies are exactly same in the amount of movement allowed
or discouraged. Further the speed of movement or change may differ from one period
of time to another. The rate of change depends upon the level of modernization of a
given society.

Mobility may be considered in different senses, such as:

(a) A change in occupation that involves a consequent change in status.
(b) A promotion within the same occupational group.
(c) The accumulation of seniority within a given occupation.
(d) A change in occupation from one generation to another, as from father to son.

Open and Closed Systems

Sociologists have identified open class systems and closed class systems. The
difference between these types of class systems are their structural mobility. In a class
system that has high structural mobility, it‘s easy to move around between social
classes based on the way the society is structured, regardless of your individual
achievements.

In an open class system, the hierarchical social status of a person is achieved through
their effort. These types of class systems are achievement-based economic system
with social mobility and relations between classes. Status based on family
background, ethnicity, gender, and religion, which is also known as ―ascribed status,‖
is less important.

In an open class system, there is no distinct line between the classes, and there is a
wide range of positions within each status level. Core industrial nations seem to have
more of an ideal open class system than less industrialized countries, in which there
are fewer opportunities for economic advancement.

Whereas, closed system, the boundary between strata are rigid and people‘s positions
are set by their ascribed status. Here status is ascribed to the individuals by society
more or less arbitrarily and permanently on the basis of traits over which they have no
control such as caste status, skin colors, estate system (in French society), gender or
age group etc. Here status is generally decided through hereditary; individual ability
and efforts usually do not count.

Types of Mobility

1. Horizontal Mobility
According to Sorokin, ―Horizontal mobility refers to territorial, religious, political
party, family, occupational and other horizontal shifting without any noticeable

25
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

change in vertical position.‖ An increase of territorial circulation of individuals within

Western societies since the second half of the nineteenth century indicate horizontal
mobility.

Under this type of social mobility, a person changes his or her occupation but the
overall social standing remains the same. Certain occupations like Doctor, Engineer,
and Professor may enjoy the same status but when an engineer changes his occupation
from engineer to teaching engineering, he has horizontally moved from one
occupational category to another. But no change has taken place in the system of
social stratification.

The individuals are no more attached to their place of birth. The individuals move
from one place to another in search of jobs which may be of same prestige. The
modern means of transportation have brought in more territorial movement of
individuals.

2. Vertical Mobility:
Vertical mobility refers to any change in the occupational, economic or political status
of an individual or a group which leads to change of their position. In the words of
Sorokin, by vertical social mobility is meant the relations involved in transition of an
individual (or a social object) from one social stratum to another. Vertical mobility
stands for change of social position either upward or downward, which can be labelled
as ascending or descending type of mobility.

There are two types of vertical social mobility – ascending and descending or social
climbing and social sinking. The ascending currents exist in the two principal forms –
as an infiltration of the individuals of a lower stratum into an existing higher one, and
as a creation of such a group into a higher stratum instead of, or side by side, with the
existing group of this stratum.

Vertical mobility is intensive in relatively open societies. Sorokin has indicated the
following general principles of vertical mobility:
(i) There has scarcely been any society whose strata were absolutely closed or in
which vertical mobility in its three forms – economic, political and occupational was
not present.
(ii) There has never been existed a society in which vertical social mobility has been
absolutely free and the transition from one social stratum to another has had no
resistance.
(iii) The intensiveness as well as the generality of vertical social mobility, varies from
society to society.
(iv) The intensiveness and generality of the vertical mobility – the economic, the
political and the occupational fluctuate in the same society at different lines.

26
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

3. Inter-Generational Mobility
This type of mobility means that one generation changes its social status in contrast to
preceding generation. However, this mobility may be upward or downward e.g.
people of lower caste or class may provide facilities to their children to get higher
education, training and skills.

According to Sorokin, the following conditions affect rates of mobility between

generations:
(a) Differences between Parents and Offspring‟s: If a parent occupies an important
position requiring high capacity, his children who are less capable are likely to be
downward mobile. Conversely, children who are more capable than their parents are
likely to be upwardly mobile, especially open-class societies.
(b) Population Change: In developed and developing countries, greater population
expansion at the lower than at the higher levels contribute to upward mobility. Overall
population growth creates new positions in the upper and middle levels, where growth
is not great enough to fill the vacancies.
(c) Changes in Occupational Structure: With the changing times many occupations
have been upgraded and downgraded because their socially defined importance has
changed. Some occupations have moved up or down because of changes in the
scarcity of workers willing and able to perform their tasks. Such changes in
occupational structure has also effected the rates of mobility between generations.

4. Intra-Generational Mobility:
This type of mobility takes place in life span of one generation. This can be further
divided into two:
(a) Change in the position of one individual in his life span
(b) Change in the position of one brother but no change in the position of another
brother.

A person may start his career as a clerk. He acquires more education and skills. Over a
period of time, he becomes an IAS officer or a Professor. In this way he moves up and
occupies a higher social position than the one with which he had started his career.

His brother may have also started his career as a clerk but did not occupy higher
position in his life span and continued to remain at the same position. Hence, within
the same generation we find that one brother changes his position and other brother
does not.

Sources and Causes of Social Mobility

Sorokin listed four primary factors, namely –

a. The demographic factors like Age, Sex, Race etc

27
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

b. Talent and Ability – Sorokin notes that usually, abilities of parents and children do
not match. Popular pressure may force-individuals to vacate positions they are
unsuited for. Even in ascriptive societies, there are scopes for mobility of individuals
in upward direction. Pareto also argues that these are the chief reasons for social
mobility in society.
c. The faulty distribution of individuals in social positions
d. The change of the social environment – Industrialization, Legal Restrictions etc.
According to Sorokin, change in social environment is one of the major factors of
social mobility.

Pierre Bourdieu describes four types of capital in his ‗An Invitation to Reflexive
Sociology, 1992‘ that place a person in a certain social category – Economic capital,
Social capital, Symbolic capital and Cultural capital etc. These broaden the scope
of meaning social mobility. At the same time, he also observed that cultural factors
also hinder social mobility of individuals. Poor have poor cultural capital which is
inherited by the young ones and it limits the avenues of mobility.

Various other factors effecting mobility are:

a. Industrialization: Industrial Revolution ushered in a new social system in which
people are given status according to their ability and training not based on their caste,
race, religion and ethnicity.
b. Urbanization: In the cities there are more people, they have formal relations.
People do not know each other intimately. Urban centers are marked by anonymity.
Urbanization facilitates social mobility by removing those factors which hinder social
mobility.
c. Modernization: The process of modernization involves use of scientific knowledge
and modern technology. It also refers to rationality and secular way of life.
d. Politicization: The political parties also educate the people about their rights. To
achieve their rights people, unite and force the authority in power to accept their
demands. These persons may use agitations, strikes etc. as methods of attaining the
desired goals. The political party to get votes provides a number of concessions. With
the help of these new concessions and provisions, they improve upon their social
status.
e. Legislation: The enactment of new laws can also facilitate social mobility.
Zaminadari Abolition Act, the legal provision for reservation of jobs and promotion
for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes has also helped in social mobility.
f. Migration: People migrate from one place to another either due to pull or push
factors. At new places, where they migrate, may have different openings and
opportunities.
g. Skills and Training: Society not only assigns higher social status but also gives
higher economic rewards and other privileges to those persons who have required
skills and training.
h. Education: It is only after acquiring minimum formal education that individual can

28
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

aspire to occupy higher positions. It is through education that in modern India the
members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes are not only able to change their
traditional occupation but have also started occupying jobs of higher prestige.
i. Motivation: Each individual has a desire not only to have a better way of living but
also wants to improve upon his social stand. In open system it is possible to achieve
any status. This openness motivates people to work hard and improve upon the skills
so that one can attain higher social status.

Social Mobility in India

When it comes to social mobility in the Indian context, certain differences are
observed as compared to Western societies. Most of the theoretical tools that are
available to study social mobility are derived from the West and hence are not always
useful in studying the Indian society. Whether we talk about inter-generational and
intra-generational mobility, vertical and horizontal mobility, they are mostly focused
on western societies and most of the examples are based on class-based occupational
categories.

Of course, as India becomes industrialized and modern, these forms of social mobility
are definitely helpful, but they don‘t always show the entire picture. As mentioned
previously, the traditional Indian society is a caste-based society and hence might be
called a closed society. But this is only true for Hindu society. The overall Indian
society, however, has many other components apart from the Hindu religion. There is
a multitude of communities, religious groups, linguistic groups and so on. Here,
Dipankar Gupta‟s conceptualization of hierarchy and difference in the context of
stratification is quite useful.

He says that in a stratified system, both hierarchy and difference are important.
According to him, hierarchy is only one kind of stratification where the strata are
arranged vertically. Difference, on the other hand, is when the strata are not arranged
vertically, but rather horizontally. For example, when it comes to language, religion,
etc, these are different groups that are not arranged in any hierarchical manner.
However, when it comes to caste, caste groups are arranged in a hierarchy. Therefore,
to get a complete picture of stratification, both hierarchy and differences must be
taken into account. In the Indian society, we see both vertical movements as well as
horizontal movements. Inter-religious conversion can be cited as one example of
horizontal movement. In the case of the caste system, a phenomenon called
Sanskritization is seen in many cases where lower castes or even tribes are seen to
emulate the rituals of the upper or dominant castes, thereby seeking upward mobility.
In many cases, tribes have converted into castes and lower castes have successfully
claimed higher caste status. These are some of the examples of mobility in the case of
the Indian society. One thing, however, must be remembered is that no single variable
operates alone. In case of India, it is often seen that caste and class are both important.
A person‘s mobility, therefore, has to be analysed across multiple variables.

29
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Work and Economic Life

Work, during much of the ancient history of the human race, was viewed as hard and
degrading. Working hard, in the absence of compulsion, was not the norm for
Hebrew, classical, or medieval cultures. Rather, it was not until the Protestant
Reformation that physical labor became culturally acceptable for all persons,
including the wealthy and elite.

Yet, even more so perhaps than the Protestant Reformation, the positive shift in the
public's perception of work can be attributed to that of the informational era, which
immediately followed the industrial work era.

Since 1956, white-collar workers in technical, managerial, and clerical positions

outnumbered workers in blue-collar jobs. Further complementing the rise in
informational type jobs was the fact that some jobs in manufacturing and industry had
also become more technical, thus necessitating a higher level of on-the-job thinking,
as machines were interfaced with computers and control systems also became more
complex

Therefore, in contrasting the work required of most people during the Industrial Age
with the workload necessitated by the Information Age, findings indicated that the
industrial jobs required little decision-making, whereas those in the Information Age
require high discretion, cerebral thinking, and greater instances of decision-making.

This paradigm shift in the workplace then translated into a change in the work ethic,
whereby employees with greater authority to make decisions felt vested in their jobs
and more connected to the roles they played in facilitating the needs of their position.

Therefore, the Information Age seemed to have cultivated a work environment

whereby employees were afforded greater opportunities to find increased self-
fulfillment and to express more of themselves through their daily job responsibilities.

Favorably, this shift brought work that people enjoyed doing and that produced
intrinsic benefits. Furthermore, the work during this period proved to be personally
rewarding and in line with the individual worker's career goals. Hence, workers had a
newfound reason to want to be successful.

Essentially, the work ethic of the 1980s stressed skill, challenge, autonomy,
recognition, and the quality of the work produced. Autonomy was seen to be an
important factor in terms of the employees being satisfied with their jobs.

Lapiere says that "social organization consists of all the ways by which men live and

30
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

work together, more especially of all the programmed, ordered and coordinated
relations of the members of the society." Social organisations at different levels
organize and give expression to collective behaviour. They coordinate and crystallize
numerous interests of individuals and groups.

Marx used a materialist analysis to show that throughout history, the resolution of
class struggles caused changes in economies. Materialist analyses focus on changes in
the economic mode of production to explain the nature and transformation of the
social order. Marx saw the history of class conflict developing dialectically from slave
and owner, to serf and lord, to journeyman and master, to worker and owner. The
resolution of one conflict was precipitated by the emergence of another. In the final
epoch of class conflict, Marx argued that the development of capitalism would lead to
the creation of a level of technology and economic organization sufficient to meet the
needs of everyone in society equally. Scarcity, poverty, and the unequal distribution of
resources were the increasingly anachronistic products of the institution of private
property. However, capitalism also created the material conditions under which the
working class, brought together en masse in factories and other workplaces, would
recognize their common interests in ending class exploitation (i.e., they would attain
―class consciousness‖). Once private property was socialized through the revolution of
the working classes, Marx argued that not only would the exploitive relationships of
capitalism come to an end, but classes and class conflict themselves would disappear.

Social Organization of Work in different types Of Society

- Slave Society, Feudal Society, Industrial Capitalist Society

Slave Society
After the initial stage of primitive communism, the second stage may be called Slave
Society, considered to be the beginning of "class society" where private property
appears.
• Class: here the idea of class appears. There is always a slave-owning ruling class and
the slaves themselves.
• Statism: the state develops during this stage as a tool for the slave-owners to use and
control the slaves.
• Agriculture: people learn to cultivate plants and animals on a large enough scale to
support large populations.
• Democracy and Authoritarianism: these opposites develop at the same stage.
Democracy arises first with the development of the republican city-state, followed by
the totalitarian empire.
• Private Property: citizens now own more than personal property. Land ownership is
especially important during a time of agricultural development.

The slave-owning class "own" the land and slaves, which are the main means of
producing wealth, whilst the vast majority have very little or nothing. The property-

31
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

less included the slave class, slaves who work for no money, and in most cases
women, who were also dispossessed during this period. From a Marxist perspective,
slave society collapsed when it exhausted itself. The need to keep conquering more
slaves created huge problems, such as maintaining the vast empire that resulted (i.e.
The Roman Empire). It is ultimately the aristocracy born in this epoch that demolishes
it and forces society to step onto the next stage.

Feudal Society
The Third Stage: may be called Feudalism; it appears after slave society collapses.
This was most obvious during the European Dark Ages when society went from
slavery to feudalism.
 Aristocracy: the state is ruled by monarchs who inherit their positions, or at
times marry or conquer their ways into leadership.
 Theocracy: this is a time of largely religious rule. When there is only one
religion in the land and its organizations affect all parts of daily life.
 Hereditary classes: castes can sometimes form and one's class is determined at
birth with no form of advancement. This was the case with India.
 Nation-state: nations are formed from the remnants of the fallen empires.
Sometimes to rebuild themselves into empires once more. Such as England's
transition from a province to an empire.
These proto-capitalist and capitalist classes are driven by the profit motive but are
prevented from developing further profits by the nature of feudal society where, for
instance, the serfs are tied to the land and cannot become industrial workers and wage
earners. Marx says, then begins an epoch of social revolution (the French Revolution
of 1789, the English Civil War.) since the social and political organization of feudal
society (or the property relations of feudalism) is preventing the development of the
capitalists' productive forces.

Capitalist Society
In Karl Marx's critique of political economy and subsequent Marxian analyses, the
capitalist mode of production refers to the systems of organizing production and
distribution within capitalist societies. The capitalist mode of production is
characterized by private ownership of the means of production, extraction of surplus
value by the owning class for the purpose of capital accumulation, wage-based labour
and—at least as far as commodities are concerned— being market-based.

Scholars do not always agree on a single definition of capitalism. Capitalism as an

economic system characterized by private ownership of property or capital (as
opposed to state ownership), sale of commodities on the open market, the purchase of
labour for wages, and the impetus to generate profit and thereby accumulate wealth.
Under capitalism, people invest capital (money or property invested in a business
venture) in a business to produce a product or service that can be sold in a market to
consumers. The investors in the company are generally entitled to a share of any profit
made on sales after the costs of production and distribution are taken out. These

32
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

investors often reinvest their profits to improve and expand the business or acquire
new ones. To illustrate how this works, consider this example.

Industrial workers on an assembly line in an automobiles factory

To provide their product or service, owners hire workers, to whom they pay wages.
The cost of raw materials, the retail price they charge consumers, and the amount they
pay in wages are determined through the law of supply and demand and by
competition. This leads to the dynamic qualities of capitalism, including its instability
and tendency toward crisis. When demand exceeds supply, prices tend to rise. When
supply exceeds demand, prices tend to fall. When multiple businesses market similar
products and services to the same buyers, there is competition. Competition can be
good for consumers because it can lead to lower prices and higher quality as
businesses try to get consumers to buy from them rather than from their competitors.
However, competition also leads to key problems like the general tendency for a
falling rate of profit, periodic crises of investment, and stock market crashes where
billions of dollars of economic value can disappear overnight.

Wages tend to be set in a similar way. People who have talents, skills, education, or
training that is in short supply and is needed by businesses tend to earn more than
people without comparable skills. Competition in the workforce helps determine how
much people will be paid. In times when many people are unemployed and jobs are
scarce, people are often willing to accept less than they would when their services are
in high demand. In this scenario, businesses are able to maintain or increase profits by
obliging workers to accept reduced wages. When fewer people are working or people

33
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

are working for lower wages, the amount of money circulating in the economy
decreases, reducing the demand for commodities and services and creating a vicious
cycle of economic recession or depression. To sum up, capitalism is defined by a
unique set of features that distinguish it from previous economic systems such as
feudalism or agrarianism, or contemporary systems such as socialism or communism:

 The means of production (i.e., productive property or capital) are privately

owned and controlled.
 Labour power is purchased from workers by capitalists for a wage or salary.
 The goal of production is to make a profit from selling commodities in a
competitive free market.
 Profit from the sale of commodities is appropriated by the owners of capital.
Part of this profit is reinvested as capital in the business enterprise in order to
expand its profitability.
 The competitive accumulation of capital and profit leads to capitalism‘s
dynamic qualities: constant expansion of markets, globalization of investment,
growth and centralization of capital, boom and bust cycles, economic crises,
class conflict, etc.

Socialism
Socialism is an economic system in which there is government ownership (often
referred to as ―state run‖) of goods and their production, with an impetus to share
work and wealth equally among the members of a society. Under socialism,
everything that people produce, including services, is considered a social product.
Everyone who contributes to the production of a good or to providing a service is
entitled to a share in any benefits that come from its sale or use. To make sure all
members of society get their fair share, government must be able to control property,
production, and distribution. The focus in socialism is on benefiting society, whereas
capitalism seeks to benefit the individual. Socialists claim that a capitalistic economy
leads to inequality, with unfair distribution of wealth and individuals who use their
power at the expense of society.

Socialism strives, ideally, to control the economy to avoid the problems and
instabilities inherent in capitalism. Within socialism, there are diverging views on the
extent to which the economy should be controlled. The communist systems of the
Soviet Union, Cuba, and China under Chairman Mao Tse Tung were organized so that
all but the most personal items were public property. Contemporary democratic
socialism is based on the socialization or government control of essential services
such as health care, education, and utilities (electrical power, telecommunications, and
sewage). This is essentially a mixed economy based on a free-market system and with
substantial portions of the economy under private control. Farms, small shops, and
businesses are privately owned, while the state might own large businesses in key
sectors like energy extraction and transportation. The central component of
democratic socialism, however, is the redistribution of wealth and the universal

34
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

provision of services like child care, health care, and unemployment insurance
through a progressive tax system.

The other area on which socialists disagree is on what level society should exert its
control. In communist countries like the former Soviet Union, China, Vietnam, and
North Korea, the national government exerts control over the economy centrally. They
had the power to tell all businesses what to produce, how much to produce, and what
to charge for it. Other socialists believe control should be decentralized so it can be
exerted by those most affected by the industries being controlled. An example of this
would be a town collectively owning and managing the businesses on which its
populace depends. Because of challenges in their economies, several of these
communist countries have moved from central planning to letting market forces help
determine many production and pricing decisions. Market socialism describes a
subtype of socialism that adopts certain traits of capitalism, like allowing limited
private ownership or consulting market demands. This could involve situations like
profits generated by a company going directly to the employees of the company or
being used as public funds. Many eastern European and some South American
countries have mixed economies. Key industries are nationalized and directly
controlled by the government; however, most businesses are privately owned and
regulated by the government.

Formal and Informal organization of work

Formal Organization
A Formal organization is created by management in the form of a structure of
authority. The whole structure and procedure are usually set in their official
documents which contain the rules and processes of the particular organization. In this
organization, the roles, functions, and responsibilities of each member are properly
defined the working progresses smoothly and systematically as a result of the
structure.

Elton Mayo referred to an organization as formal when the activities of two or more
individuals are consciously coordinated towards the accomplishment of a given
objective. He observes that formal organization comes into being when several

35
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

persons:
a) are able to communicate with each other,
b) are willing to act, and
c) share purpose.

The formal organizations according to him refer to the structure of jobs and positions
with defined functions and relationships. This type of organization is built by the
management to realize the objectives on an enterprise. Whereas the informal
organization refers to the relationships between people in an organization based not on
procedures but on personal attitudes, prejudices, likes and dislikes.

Characteristics of formal organization:

1. It is impersonal or abstract in nature i.e. it is the job or the position which is of
prime importance whereas the men who perform the role are secondary in nature.
2. The relationship between the members is designed in such a manner that the formal
relationship is in coordination with plans which are laid down to achieve the goals of
the organization.
3. It is a part of the wider system and it includes material and non-material elements as
well as economic, political and administrative system which may be reflected in the
human environment.
4. All individuals in the organization are assigned specific duties and
responsibilities.
5. All the activities are directed towards the attainment of the goals.
6. There is a clear distinction between superior and subordinate relationships.
7. There is a system of coordination between the activities of the individuals of the
departments.
8. All formal organizations have their own rules and regulations.

Examples: Bureaucracy, Co-operative societies, MNCs etc.

Problems of formal organization:

Some of the problems faced by the workers in the formal organizations are
1. Related to automatization, privatization and liberalization.
2. Due to the merger of Indian industries with multination companies the workers are
facing the problems of lay off, voluntary or compulsory retirement.
3. A large number of workers are unskilled or semi-skilled and therefore there is little
scope of their employment. Even the skilled workers have to improve their
knowledge.
4. There is no job security as the system of `Hire & Fire„ is followed. Information
revolution has changed the entire demand and supply pattern.
5. The Unions have not been able to protect its members because of downsizing &

36
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

outsourcing.
Due to all these factors, the numbers of workers have become less and they have lost
their strength to bargain with their employers.

Informal Organization
An Informal organization is less structured and more fluid as it is born out of mutual
relations and It arises spontaneously as people interact with each other. It usually does
not have strict rules and regulations to be followed. Thus It depends on the social
relationships of the individuals in the organization and the workings depend on the
interactions between them.

Elton Mayo studied a group of industrial workers who had formed their own small
groups which had rules that were not necessarily in compliance with these of the
management but it was observed that the members followed them because they had
the freedom to express their views freely, share their experiences and problems,
cooperate with each other and at the same time have some kind of status which would
not exist in the formal organization. Infact, on the basis of the relation within the
formal organization social scientist can determine the functioning of the formal
organization.

He regarded informal organization as joint individual activity without conscious joint

purpose, even though contributing to joint results. All types of groups, namely, a bus
load of passengers, people watching a cricket match, people walking do the street etc.,
fall within the compass of informal organization.

Informal organization fosters communication between people and establishes pattern

of behaviour, namely, conformity in speech dress, conduct or other behaviour and
thereby promotes smooth group operations.

Features of the informal organization:

1. Ease of entry – Since there is no need of any formal selection, workers can get job
easily. In the urban areas there is more scope for individuals to get an entry if so
desired. This results in the unorganized organization having all kinds of workers viz.
skilled, semi-skilled, unskilled, literature, temporary or permanent.
2. Reliance on indigenous resource:- Informal manufacturing units use goods, raw
materials which are easily available and not very expensive. This includes the
employment of workers who may not be very skilled or efficient.
3. Family enterprise – By this we mean that all family members contribute to the
production of goods. As the work is of such a type that no special quality is required
to perform the given task.
4. Small scale of operation – Production is on a very small scale as a result of which
the number of workers required is also very less the capital which is involved is
invested at a very small scale.

37
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

5. Labour intensive technology – In the informal organization there is more emphasis

on simple tools and machines or it is done by hands.
6. The skills for operating the production of goods is not obtained formally but learnt
only by practice. It is only through observation that the workers gradually learns to
master the art.
7. Since the goods produced by the informal organization‗s are those which can be
afforded by the poor or the middle class people, there are no advertisements or
campaigns, but they are distributed on a door to door basis. That is why it is said that
market is not stable or protected.
8. The informal organizations are not officially recognized. Because of this they are
not registered with the government. Also due to this they lose may tax concessions
and they cannot apply for space, water or power facilities.

Examples: Traditional panchayats caste associations, Temple committees, Sports

groups cultural, Groups festival committees, Neighbourhood associations etc.

Difference between Formal and Informal Organizations:

1. Informal organization is an official network of personal and social relations which
is not established by formal authority. It arises spontaneously as people associate with
one
another. The emphasis within informal organization is on people and their
relationships whereas formal organization emphasis official position in terms of
authority and responsibility.
2. Informal power is attached to the person while formal authority is attached to the
position and a person has it only when they occupy that position.
3. Informal power is personal but formal authority is institutional.
4. Powers in informal organization is given by group members rather than delegated
by managers. Therefore, it does not follow the official chain of command. It is more
likely to come from peers than from superiors or supervisors in the formal hierarchy
and it may cut cross organizational lines in other departments. It is usually more
unstable then formal authority.
5. As the informal organization is subject to the sentiments of people and because of
its subjective nature, informal organization cannot be controlled by management in the
way a formal organization is controlled.
6. A manager typically holds some informal powers [personal power] along with
formal power [positional power]. But usually a manager does not have more informal
power. This means that the manager and the informal leader usually are two different
persons in the work group.
7. As a result of difference between formal & informal sources of power formal
organization may grow to immense size but informal organization tender to remain
smaller in order to keep within the limits of personal relationship. The result is that a
large organization tender to have hundreds of informal organization generating
thought.

38
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

8. Because of the small size & instability informal organizations are not suitable
substitutes for large formal organizational agitations of people & resources that are
needed for modern institutions.
9. Workers recognize the differences in rules played by formal & informal
organization including the more secondary role normalcy played by the informal
organization. One study of workers & managers saw the informal organization as
influential & beneficial. They viewed the formal organization as more influential &
beneficial.

According to Peter Blau& Elton Mayo who have studied the informal organization
had come to the following conclusion i.e. in the large formal organization a close
group emerges which works in an apparently opposite direction but its efficiency is
better and more advantageous for the company. At the same time, the study reveled
that due to the freedom given to the workers to express themselves. They developed
more confidence and could also resolve the problems more efficiently.

Labour and Society

In modern industrial societies, human labor is only one dimension of work as other is
taken over by machines. Labor in modern societies has left the atmosphere of home
and has shifted to ‗workplaces‘. Labor is now sold in market and not used solely for
domestic production.

In this respect modern industrial work is highly differentiated and specialized, the
whole production is split into a number of Stages or Steps, in each of which one or
more specialized group of worker are involved, work is also shifted from home to
factor in modern economy machinery and equipment were concentrated in factories.
People seeking jobs in factories would be trained to perform a specialized task and
received a wage for his work.

Labor has various broad classifications like – industrial labor, rural labor, feminine
labor, child labor, formal labor and informal labor. One important characteristic of
industrial societies is the marketing of human labor. Another characteristic of labor in
modern societies is its high division.

The impact of such division of labour had been studied a number of sociologist on
Individual and society as a whole for move toward industrialsation and wage labour
was sure. To result in alienation among workers, they are employed in factory,
workers would lose all control over the labour they would be obligate to form routing
task that would strict their work. Workers in a capita list system eventually adopt an
instrument orientation to work, Marx argued and saw it is nothing more than a way to
earn living.

Marx also believed that work provide the most important and the vital means for man

39
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

to fulfill his basis needs his individuality and his humanity but so for work would not
be felt in such whole a complete fulfilled sense. Similarly, Roberl Blawner has
mentioned earlier as conducted experiments to study the relationship between
technology and alienation.

Durkheim was optimistic when he emphasized on this strengthen of Social solidarity

through specialization of roles but he also warns of the situation like anomy.

Robert Blauner has examined the impact of automation on worker, their skills and in
their level of commitment. He argued that the introduction of automation to factories
was responsible for reducing alienation, automation held to integrate the work force
which had been lacking with other forms of technology.

A very different thesis was set forced by Harry Braverman in his famous Labour and
Monopoly Capital, 1974 where he states that automation was part of all the overall ―
de-skilling of the industrial labour force by imposing Taylorist organizational
technique and breaking up the labour process into specialized task. Managers were
able to exert control over the work in both industrial setting and modern office. The
introduction of technology contributed to over-all ―degradation of work while by
limiting the need for creative human source, instead; all that was required and non-
responsive unthinking, body capable of performing and endlessly the some unskilled
tasks.

Michael Burawoy rejects Marxian argument that workers are always in a

disadvantaged position. He rejects Marx‘s explanation that workers work hard due to
coercion. The advent of labor unions and other changes largely eliminated the
arbitrary power of management. To Burawoy, workers, at least in part, consent to
work hard in the capitalist system, and at least part of that consent is produced in the
workplace.

Feminist perspective views labor in society in terms of female participation.

According to Ann Oakley, industrialization led to confinement of women at home.
Workforce participation was limited as women were forced to take the role of
housewife. Recent studies have however shown that workforce participation of
women is increasing, but there is also an occupational segregation as well. Until
recently paid work in western countries was predominantly the sphere of men. Today
more and more women have molded into labour force between 35 - 60% of women
aged between 16-60 in most European countries hold paid job outside that home.

Today is what we will call Knowledge Economy where we are gradually leading to a
new type of society no longer based on primarily on industrialism that is the age of
beyond industrialism a phase of development which is coined in a number of ways to
describe this new social order such as post-industrial society, the information age and
the new economy, knowledge economy is however more common. A knowledge

40
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

worker is one who is involved mostly in design development, marketing, sale and
servicing of material goods. Knowledge based industries are understood broadly
which include high technology education, training and research & development and
the financial investment sector.

Globalization of labor is another aspect of labor in post-modern times. Labor, today is

marked by high mobility, trans-boundary movement etc. World becomes increasingly
competitive as industries also shift in search of cheaper production. It also leads to
degradation of labor as it is evident in the rise of sweatshops in China. In the light of
the impact of the global economy and the demand for a flexible labour force, some
sociologist and economist have argued that more people in the future will become
portfolio workers. They will have skill portfolio – a number of different job skill and
credentials which they will use to move between several jobs during the course of
their working lives. Only a relatively small proportion of workers will have
continuous careers in the current sense.

41
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Politics and Society

Most political scientists see power as a zero-sum game. If one side wins, the other side loses.

Sociologists have a distinctive approach to studying governmental power and

authority that differs from the perspective of political scientists. For the most part,
political scientists focus on studying how power is distributed in different types of
political systems. They would observe, for example, that the Indian political system is
a republic democracy divided into three distinct branches of government (legislative,
executive, and judicial), and might explore how public opinion affects political
parties, elections, and the political process in general. Sociologists, however, tend to
be more interested in government more generally; that is, the various means and
strategies used to direct or conduct the behaviour and actions of others (or of oneself).
As Michel Foucault described it, government is the ―conduct of conduct,‖ the way
some seek to act upon the conduct of others to change or channel that conduct in a
certain direction.

Max Weber defined power as ―the chance of a man or of a number of men to realize
their own will in a communal action even against the resistance of others who are
participating in the action‖. Authority is when power or domination is perceived to be
legitimate or justified rather than coercive. Authority refers to accepted power — that
is, power that people agree to follow. People listen to authority figures because they
feel that these individuals are worthy of respect. Generally speaking, people perceive
the objectives and demands of an authority figure as reasonable and beneficial, or true.

Sociological theories of Power

Functionalist Theory
Talcott Parsons conceives of political organization as functionally organized about
the attainment of collective goals, i.e., the attainment or maintenance of states of

42
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

interaction between the system and its environing situation that are relatively desirable
from the point of view of the system. From the viewpoint of the system, the ―polity‖
exists to perform specific functions and meet certain needs generated by society. In
particular, it exists to provide a means of attaining ―desirable‖ collective goals by
being the site of collective decision making. According to functionalism, modern
forms of government have four main purposes: planning and directing society,
meeting collective social needs, maintaining law and order, and managing
international relations.

Marxist Theory
Marx and Engels put it in The Communist Manifesto, ―The executive of the modern
state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie‖.
They stated that the state was created to defend primarily the economic interests and
ultimately the state (along with its police, military and bureaucracy) was converted
into an instrument used by the owners of property i.e. the bourgeoisie.

According to Ralph Miliband the state is used as an instrument for the fulfilment of
interests of a particular class or section of society. The bourgeoisie, in order to
establish its full control over the industry and the economy has constantly transformed
the industry, mode of production. The bourgeoisie did it by presenting new
machineries and improved techniques of production into industries. By doing this, the
capitalist class has been able to articulate its full hold over all the branches of
economy.

It is demonstrated in political studies that the state generally admits those policies and
tries to implement schemes which will give constructive results in the long run and
will serve the purpose of the state as well as that of the bourgeoisie in effective way.
The state gives priority to long term interests over short term interests. Furthermore, in
a pluralist society, there are a number of elite groups. Sometimes these are involved in
conflict and the state authority proceeds cautiously and judiciously.

According to Louis Althusser the ruling class uses repressive state apparatuses
(RSA) to dominate the working class. The basic, social function of the RSA
(government, courts, police and armed forces, etc.) is timely intervention within
politics in favour of the interests of the ruling class, by repressing the subordinate
social classes as required, using either violent or nonviolent coercive means. The
ruling class controls the RSA because they also control the powers of the state
(political, legislative, executive, army).

He distinguished the repressive apparatuses of the state from the ideological

apparatuses of the state (ISA), which comprise an array of social institutions and
multiple, political realities that propagate many ideologies—the religious, the
educational, the family, the legal, the political, the communications, the cultural, etc.

43
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

The differences between the RSA and the ISA are:

 The repressive state apparatus (RSA) functions as a unified entity (an
institution), unlike the ideological state apparatus (ISA), which is diverse in
nature and plural in function. What unites the disparate ISA, however, is their
ultimate control by the ruling ideology.
 The apparatuses of the state, repressive and ideological, each perform the
double functions of violence and ideology. A state apparatus cannot be
exclusively repressive or exclusively ideological. The distinction between an
RSA and an ISA is its primary function in society: respectively, the
administration of violent repression and the dissemination of ideology. In
practice, the RSA is the means of repression and violence, and, secondarily, a
means of ideology; whereas, the primary, practical function of the ISA is as the
means for the dissemination of ideology, and, secondarily, as a means of
political violence and repression. The secondary functions of the ISA are
effected in a concealed and a symbolic manner.

Moreover, when individual persons and political groups threaten the social order
established by the dominant social class, the state invokes the stabilizing functions of
the repressive state apparatus. As such, the benign forms of social repression affect the
judicial system, where ostensibly public contractual language is invoked in order to
govern individual and collective behaviour in society. As internal threats (social,
political, economic) to the dominant order appear, the state applies proportionate
social repression: police suppression, incarceration, and military intervention.

Poulantzas's theory of the state reacted to what he saw as simplistic understandings

within Marxism. He saw the capitalist class as too focused on its individual short-term
profit, rather than on maintaining the class's power as a whole, to simply exercise the
whole of state power in its own interest. Poulantzas argued that the state, though
relatively autonomous from the capitalist class, nonetheless functions to ensure the
smooth operation of capitalist society, and therefore benefits the capitalist class.

Poulantzas argued that repressing movements of the oppressed is not the sole function
of the state. Rather, state power must also obtain the consent of the oppressed. It does
this through class alliances, where the dominant group makes an "alliance" with
subordinate groups as a means to obtain the consent of the subordinate group. He
explains it with the example through the analysis of the New Deal in the United
States: the American ruling class, by acceding to some of the demands of labour
(things like minimum wage, labour laws, etc.), helped cement an alliance between
labour and a particular fraction of capital and the state. This was necessary for
continued existence of capitalism, for if the ruling class had simply repressed the
movements and avoided making any concessions, it could have led to a proletariat
revolution.

44
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Elite Theories
According to these theories, power in democratic societies is concentrated in the
hands of a few wealthy individuals and organizations—or economic elites—that exert
inordinate influence on the government and can shape its decisions to benefit their
own interests. Far from being a neutral referee over competition among veto groups,
the government is said to be controlled by economic elites or at least to cater to their
needs and interests.

Classical Elite Theories

a) Circulation of Elites

Pareto argued that elites possess either lion-like or fox-like qualities that are required to rule

Vilfredo Pareto in his The Mind and Society, 1935 summarized ―The Pareto
principle‖, or the ―80/20‖ rule. This purported that in all societies, throughout history,
80% of all assets were always owned by the top 20% of the population. And to this
elite 20%, of two broad overlapping types, Pareto assigned names: Foxes and Lions.
Foxes tended to dominate through means of superior negotiating skills and persuasion
rather than coercion or force. They were liberal, internationalist and moral. Recent
examples could include Obama‘s presidency.

The second type of elites are Lions, and were of a very different nature. And here the
themes begin to resonate with what is happening to our world today. For Pareto these
people were, amongst other things, populist, xenophobic and in favour of simplistic
uncompromising action instead of compromise. Their economic policies revolved
around protectionism and rigid national self-interest. Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil, Boris
Johnson of UK comes under this category.

45
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Vilfredo Pareto says that people are always governed by elites except short period of
time. He rejects a linear progressive evolutionary interpretation of history and social
change. For him, "history of men is the history of the continues replacement of certain
elites as one ascends another declines, such is the real phenomenon, though to us it
may often appear under another form".

Pareto emphasised the importance of the psychological characteristics of elites which

made them superior to the masses & unable them to gain & hold power. To Pareto
elites are those people who possess in marked degree qualities of intelligence,
character, capacity, of whatever kind. According to Pareto, ―By elite, we mean the
small number of individuals who, in each sphere of activity, have succeeded and have
arrived at a higher echelon in the professional hierarchy.‖ Examples are the
successful businessmen, artists, successful writers, professors etc.

Pareto also speculated on how one type of elite tends to be followed by another. He
argued that over time that the established elite naturally degenerates, becoming
insensitive to the material conditions of the forgotten and left behind – much as you
may hear about in the average Trump speech (or in his inauguration, above). The elite
accumulate wealth at the expense of the masses and their power and ease of life
triggers moral decay. When an elite crumbles in this way they lose their intellectual
ability and right to rule, it says, before there arises an unscrupulous opportunist ready
to exploit the concerns of ―ordinary people‖. But not only do they voice the just
concerns of the people, they deliberately and falsely mimic the prejudices and anger of
the dispossessed just to gain power.

Gaetano Mosca emphasized the sociological and personal characteristics of elites. He

said elites are an organized minority and that the masses are an unorganized majority.
The ruling class is composed of the ruling elite and the sub-elites. He divides the
world into two groups: a) Political class; b) Non-Political class.

Mosca asserts that elites have intellectual, moral, and material superiority that is
highly esteemed and influential.

He contended that, whatever the form of government, power would be in the hands of
a minority who formed the ruling class. Explaining the contentious historical division
between the ruling class and the class that is ruled, Mosca explained the rule of
minority over the majority by the fact that it is organized and is usually composed of
superior individuals.

The minority is organized for the very reason that it is a minority. Members of a ruling
minority have some attributes, real or apparent, which are highly esteemed and are
very influential in the society in which the minority lives. Mosca also introduced the
concept of the sub-elite. This group is composed of civil servants, managers of
industries, scientists and scholars and is also known as ‗new middle class‘.

46
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Both Pareto and Mosca conceive the concept of elite as a minority which rules over
the majority or the rest of the society. This class of people has the direct influence
over the decision-making process by influencing the decision-makers.

However, there is a difference between both the scholars regarding the nature of elites.
Pareto stresses the universality of distinction between ruling elite and the masses.
Mosca, on the other hand, distinguishes between masses and elite only with reference
to the Marxian theory of economic classes; otherwise he says that the elite itself is
influenced and restrained by the various social factors. Pareto has reserved his
comments for the modern notions of democracy, while Mosca has recognized and to
some extent appreciated the special characteristics of democratic elites.

Pareto differs from Mosca when he insists that the character of democratic elites is not
qualitatively different in democracy. Mosca, on the other hand, lays emphasis on the
plurahstic character of democratic elites and postulates a reciprocal relationship
between the rulers and the ruled, instead of simple dominance by the rulers over the
ruled.

Mosca identifies the political class with men of property in general, and sometimes
with intelligentsia, but most often with the political personnel in government. Not only
this, as written earlier, Mosca introduced a concept of sub-elite in his theory we do not
find in Pareto‘s theory such distinction of elites.

Classical elite theory has been accused of being too simplistic. This is because they
says all societies are similar, however, even in the modern world, there is massive
difference between different societies, for example North Korea and South Korea,
although neighbours, couldn‘t be more different.

However contemporary elite theory has differing views to that of classical Elite
Theory. The main difference being that many modern elite theorist sociologists
believe that rule by elites isn‘t inevitable in society.

The Power Elite Theory

The most famous elite theory is the power-elite theory of C. Wright Mills. In his
book The Power Elite, Mills theorized that the American doctrine of balance of power
is an ideal showing less vigor today than was true in the past. According to Mills,
there is a power elite in modern societies, an elite who command the resources of vast
bureaucratic organizations that have come to dominate industrial societies.

47
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

According to Mills, the power elite are the key people in the three major institutions of
modern society: 1) Economy; 2) Government; and 3) Military.

The bureaucracies of state, corporations, and military have become enlarged and
centralized and are a means of power never before equaled in human history. These
hierarchies of power are the key to understanding modern industrial societies.

The elite occupy the key leadership positions within the bureaucracies that now
dominate modern societies, the positions in which the effective means of power are
now located. Thus their power is rooted in authority, an attribute of social
organizations, not of individuals. It is not a conspiracy of evil men, he argues, but a
social structure that has enlarged and centralized the decision-making process and
then placed this authority in the hands of men of similar social background and
outlook.

Of the three sectors of institutional power, Mills claims, the corporate sector is the
most powerful. But the power elite cannot be understood as a mere reflection of
economic elites; rather it is the alliance of economic, political, and military power.
Mills saw two other levels of power in American society below power elite. At the
bottom are the great masses of people. Largely unorganized, ill informed, and
virtually powerless, they are controlled and manipulated from above. The masses are
economically dependent; they are economically and politically exploited. Because
they are disorganized, the masses are far removed from the classic democratic public
in which voluntary organizations hold the key to power.

Between the masses and the elite Mills saw a middle level of power. Composed of
local opinion leaders and special interest groups, they neither represent the masses nor
have any real effect on the elite. Mills saw the American Congress and American
political parties as a reflection of this middle-level of power. Although Congress and
political parties debate and decide some minor issues, the power elite ensures that no
serious challenge to its authority and control is tolerated in the political arena. The
positions of the elite allow them to transcend the ordinary environments of men and
women. The elite have access to levers of power that make their decisions.

48
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

According to Mills, the rise of the military state serves the interests of the elite of
industrial societies. For the politician the projection of military power serves as a
cover for their lack of vision and innovative leadership. For corporate elites the
preparations for war and the projection of military power underwrites their research
and development as well as provides a guarantee of stable profits through corporate
subsidies. This militarism is inculcated in the population through school room and
pulpit patriotism, through manipulation and control of the news, through the
cultivation of opinion leaders and unofficial ideology.

Criticisms of C. Wright Mills

 Critics say that his research can only be applied to US society as that is where
he studied.
 Also Dahl argues that pressure groups, religious leaders, trade unions etc.
provide a counterbalance to the power elite, effectively reducing the power the
elites have in society.
 Marxists also disagree, saying power in society doesn‘t come from positions in
institutions but instead from owning the means of production.

Pularist Theory
Robert Dahl in his pluralist theory, considers society is made up of numerous
competing interest groups — capital, labour, religious fundamentalists, feminists,
gays, small business, homeless people, taxpayers, elderly, military, pacifists, etc. —
whose goals are diverse and often incompatible. In democratic societies, power and
resources are widely distributed among veto groups, albeit unevenly, so no one veto
group can attain the power to permanently dominate the entire society. Therefore, the
state or government has to act as a neutral mediator to negotiate, reconcile, balance,
find compromise, or decide among the divergent interests.

He says political power in the United States and other democracies is dispersed that
compete in the political process for resources and influence. Sometimes one particular
veto group may win and other times another group may win, but in the long run they
win and lose equally and no one group has any more influence than another.

Pluralist theory says as this process unfolds, the government might be an active
participant, but it is an impartial participant. Just as parents act as impartial arbiters
when their children argue with each other, so does the government act as a neutral
referee to ensure that the competition among veto groups is done fairly, that no group
acquires undue influence, and that the needs and interests of the citizenry are kept in
mind.

The process of veto-group competition and its supervision by the government is

functional for society, according to pluralist theory, for three reasons. First, it ensures
that conflict among the groups is channeled within the political process instead of

49
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

turning into outright hostility. Second, the competition among the veto groups means
that all of these groups achieve their goals to at least some degree. Third, the
government‘s supervision helps ensure that the outcome of the group competition
benefits society as a whole.

Bureaucracy

Hegelian Concept
Hegel in his concept of the idealist state gave the theory of bureaucracy. Like Marx,
Hegel‘s main concern was not bureaucracy as such, but he developed it in the larger
interest in examining the nature of the state. The state, for Hegel, is the last
development in a series of rational social orders; the other two being the family and
the civil society. Once the state is produced, it is supposed to provide the grounds
where the unconscious and particularly oriented activities become gradually self-
conscious and public-spirited. For Hegel, the prince, the bureaucrats and the deputies
of the estates are political actors par excellence. In his Philosophy of Right (1921), he
raised the concept of bureaucracy to abstract heights—a transcending entity, a mind
above individual minds. He defined it as a ―state formalism‖ of civil society, and the
state power as a corporation.

Marxian View
Karl Marx did not study elaborately on bureaucracy. He studied bureaucracy in the
context of the capitalist state and its administrative apparatus. He deduced the notion
of bureaucracy from the relationship that existed between the power-holding
institutions, primarily the state and the social groups subordinated to it. The
significance of Marx‘s analysis of bureaucracy lies in his insistence that bureaucratic
structures do not automatically reflect the prevailing social power relations but pervert
and disfigure them. Bureaucracy is thus the image of a prevailing social power,
distorted by its claim of universality.

Weberian View
Under the legal-rational system, the acceptance of authority is sought on the basis of
rules, which are framed in an impersonal, impartial and rational manner. It is to be
noted that Weber never defined bureaucracy; rather, he outlined the essential features
of an ideal type bureaucratic organisation based on the legal-rational system. His ideal
type bureaucracy consists of structural and behavioural features such as rationality,
division of work and specialisation, hierarchical authority system, merit-based
recruitment and promotion, distinction between the position and its incumbent,
between public and private, emphasis on written documents, office procedures, rule-
orientation, formalism, etc.

Max Weber recommended bureaucracy as the best way for large organizations to
maintain order and maximize efficiency. In his Economy and Society, 1922 Weber

50
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

argued that bureaucracy‘s hierarchal structure and consistent processes represented the
ideal way to organize all human activity. Weber also defined the essential
characteristics of modern bureaucracy as follows:
 A hierarchical chain of command in which the top bureaucrat has ultimate
authority.
 A distinct division of labor with each worker doing a specific job.
 A clearly defined and understood set of organizational goals.
 A clearly-written set of formal rules, which all employees agree to follow.
 Job performance is judged by worker productivity.
 Promotion is merit-based.

To Weber, the bureaucracy is a particular type of administrative structure developed

in association with the rational legal mode of authority. In his view, it is capable of
attaining the highest degree of efficiency, and is in this sense formally the most
rational known means of exercising authority over human beings. However, he
warned, if not properly controlled, bureaucracy could threaten individual freedom,
locking people in a rules-based iron cage that traps individuals in systems based
solely on efficiency, rational calculation and control.

Causes for the Emergence of Bureaucratic Organisation

Weber gave many causes for the emergence of an organisation based upon legal and
rational principles, three of which, however, need special attention:
a. The creation of a money economy: The emergence of money economy was a
major factor in the development of a rational form of administration. Weber states that
while capitalism and bureaucracy have arisen from many different historical sources,
they are today interdependent; capitalism is the most rational economic basis for
bureaucratic domination, since it supplies the necessary monetary resources for the
payment of officials. Thus, the bureaucracy presupposes a monetary economy for its
continued existence.
b. The emergence of a capitalist economy: The system of free enterprise, the
essence of capitalism, fostered bureaucracy. It created those needs which only a
bureaucratic organisation could satisfy. The growth of capitalism required and even
encouraged a strong and orderly government based on a bureaucratic organisation in
its own interests. Not only governments but also capitalist enterprises themselves
began to follow the bureaucratic principles of organisation because of the
requirements of rationality and calculability—the prime feature of capitalism.
c. The more encompassing trend towards rationalism in the Westernsocieties:
This trend found an expression in a general „disenchantment‟ or demystification of
the world, in a more effective adaptation of means to ends and a more systematic
organisation of reality. For Weber, the Protestant ethic was the basic of the spirit of
capitalism which called for the rational investment of time and effort so as to
maximise profit and achievements.

51
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Weber formulated his ideal type concept of bureaucracy having in mind mainly the
administrative apparatus of the modern Western state. Being primarily concerned with
explaining the features of Western civilisation, he wanted to examine the process that
made the state apparatus of western European societies approach closely his ideal type
of bureaucracy. He observed that the power position of bureaucracy could vary from
case to case, but its permanence and technical indispensability in the modern societies
was beyond doubt. Revolutions of all type in the modern societies could change
radically the power positions of various groups, but even they could never abolish
Bureaucracy. Whatever the political regime and whatever the socio-political changes
in the modern society, according to Weber, bureaucracy was there to stay.

On this account, Weber did not agree with the Marxist notion of the eventual
disappearance of bureaucracy. He criticised the Marxist theory of socialism,
contending that the socialisation of the means of production would merely subject the
economic life to the bureaucratic management of the state. The state would in this way
become totalitarian as Weber felt that this socialism would lead to not an egalitarian
society but to further serfdom. For him, the dictatorship of the official and not that of
the worker is on the march.

Weber himself was aware that an ideal bureaucratic functioning is a difficult

proposition—a mere abstraction. Weber‘s model of bureaucracy has met with a lot of
criticism, which is as follows:

Robert Merton, who argued that there is a tendency for ―the rules to become more
important than the ends they were designed to serve, resulting in goal displacement
and loss of organisational effectiveness‖. Merton was among the first sociologists to
emphasise systematically the dysfunctional aspects of bureaucracy i.e. red-tapism and
inefficiency.

Lipset contends that bureaucrats have their own vested interests in the existing legal
order and therefore are resistant to change. This is where bureaucracy is attacked as an
impediment both to democracy, and more particularly, to change.

According to Gouldner, certain characteristics enumerated by Weber are mutually

inconsistent. There is an inbuilt contradiction between the authority of the experts and
the authority of a hierarchy based on discipline. One comes from superior knowledge
and another from the office held.

Pressure groups
According to Robert A. Dahl, any association that tries to secure from the state
policies favourable to its members or followers is a pressure group. Pressure groups
are collections of individuals who hold a similar set of values and beliefs based on
ethnicity, religion, political philosophy, or a common goal. Based on these beliefs,

52
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

they take action to promote change and further their goals. In any country, especially a
democratic one, we see large number of organized groups which, directly or indirectly
influence politics and government. The members of such organized groups are united
in respect of some specific interests that they tend to advance. For example, the
workers of a factory are organized in what is called the trade union to promote their
interests. Similarly, there are other organized groups.

Pressure groups have become increasingly important as a means by which individuals

can attempt to influence governments regarding their particular requirements.
Although individuals within a representative democracy possess rights, allowing them
to lobby parliamentarians and governments concerning pertinent issues, a collective
approach can often exert more powerful pressure on decision makers, as well as
consolidating a range of similar ideas and opinions into a cohesive format.

Pressure groups vary in size and organisational structure, which may not necessarily
represent the amount of influence exerted upon a government‘s policies. It is obvious
that trade unions, business organisations and professional associations can exert
considerable pressure upon governments. On the other hand, a small ad hoc
committee, established because of a local issue, may rally sufficient supporters for
mass demonstrations or marches, and thus, pressure a government into quickly
altering its policies.

Characteristics of Pressure Groups

a. Formal Organisation: They have their own constitutions, office bearers and office,
etc wherefrom they carry out their activities to contact members and issue them
special instructions.
b. Based on Certain Interests: Each pressure group organises itself keeping in view
certain interests and thus tries to adopt the structure of power in the political systems.
These groups try to dominate the political structure and to see that groups whose
interests clash with theirs are suppressed.
c. Voluntary Membership: The membership of a pressure group is voluntary. In
other words, it depends on the will of a person and no pressure is exerted on him/her
to become or leave as its member. For example, every student is not the member of
student unions. d. Use of Modern as well as Traditional Means: They try to follow
modern means of exerting pressure alongside traditional or old ways of operation like
financing of political parties, sponsoring their close candidates at the time of elections
and keeping the bureaucracy also satisfied. Their traditional means include
exploitation of race, gender, caste, creed and religious feelings to promote their
interests.
e. Influencing Public Policy: In order to protect and promote their interests they
establish contacts with legislators, ministers and government officials and acquaint
them with their problems. Through means of propagation they try to win public
opinion over to their sides.
f. Non- political Character: Ordinarily they do not directly participate in the politics

53
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

of the country. They do not field their candidates in elections directly. Sometimes they
support those candidates who promise to protect their interests.
g. Lack of Responsibility: Pressure groups, like the political parties are not
answerable to the people. They do not derive power from the people, but they get it
from their members.

It is important to make a distinction between an interest group and a pressure group.

Interest groups may exist without even exerting pressure on the government or the
decision-makers. A group that does not exert pressure to influence or pressurize the
authorities in order to achieve the desired objects, is not called a pressure group. An
interest group that exerts pressure on the government to achieve its goals is called a
pressure group. All pressure groups are interest groups while all interest groups may
not be pressure groups. The following differences between the two groups are
significant:

l. Interest group is a group of those persons who are bonded with each other by
particular interest or gain motive and remain conscious of these bonds. Whenever
some interest group puts pressure on the government for its benefit, it assumes the
form of pressure group. Generally the interest groups work in the form of pressure
groups.
2. Pressure groups are strictly structured whereas interest groups are formally
organised.
3. Pressure groups are pressure focused. Interest groups are interest oriented.
4. Pressure groups must influence the policies of government. Interest groups may or
may not.
5. Pressure groups are harsher in attitude whereas interest groups are softer in outlook.
6. Pressure groups are protective and promotive. Interest groups are more or less
protective.
7. Pressure groups usually work for the benefit of their members, while in interest
groups their members may or may not be benefitted.

Pressure Groups enhance the political system through:

1. Pressure groups are a vital link between the government and the governed. They
keep governments more responsive to the wishes of the community, especially in
between elections.
2. Pressure groups are able to express the views of minority groups in the community
who might not otherwise receive a hearing.
3. Pressure groups are able to use their expertise to provide the government with
important information.
4. Pressure groups offer an alternative source of advice to the government, separate
from that coming from the Public Service.
5. Pressure groups generally promote opportunities for political participation for

54
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

citizens, without the need to join a political party. Moreover, they allow for the
democratic rights of freedom of speech, assembly and association to be upheld.

Pressure Groups distort the political system by means of:

1. Pressure groups may represent a powerful minority force in society and exert
political influence to the detriment of the majority of society. This is an argument
often leveled at trade unions and business groups.
2. Some pressure groups exert influence because of their financial position,
membership or organisation. This influence may be out of proportion to their position
in society.
3. The use of direct action by pressure groups (eg. strikes by unions, demonstrations,
blockades, pickets) can cause hardship to the community in general.
4. Some pressure groups are not democratic in themselves. Some have powerful, but
unrepresentative leaders who may not be representative of anyone but themselves.
Some leaders do not reflect the opinions of their organisation‘s members.

Pressure Groups exert their influence by:

1. Lobbying state members and the Parliament via petitions, letters and deputations;
2. Consulting with ministers or senior public servants;
3. Hiring professional lobbyists;
4. Taking legal action through injunctions or appeals to higher courts;
5. Campaigning for, or opposing, certain candidates at elections;
6. Demonstrating outside Parliament and government offices or marching in the
streets;
7. Using the industrial muscle of strikes for political purposes.

Because of the complexities of modern government, and the pluralistic nature of

Indian society, pressure groups provide a means by which ordinary citizens can
participate in the decision making process, as well as maintaining a check on
government activity. Similarly, governments can be better informed of the electorate‘s
sensitivities to policies, because of the pressures articulated by these groups.

Political parties
Edmund Burke defined a political party, as a body of men and women united on the
basis of their shared political ideas so as to promote the national interest. Some have
viewed it as a political organization with a hierarchical network, which attempts to
nominate its candidates in order to get them elected as statesmen in the legislature.

A political party generally is as an organized body of people who share common

principles and cherish certain common goals regarding the political system. A political
party operates and seeks political power through constitutional means to translate its

55
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

policies into practice. It is a body of like-minded people having similar views on

matters of public concern.

Political parties function as a medium the public and the government and also play
many other vital roles in the political system. Functionally, they can be defined as
bodies that organize public opinion and interest; transmit public demands to the
government; attempt to recruit and propose political leadership; and often attempt to
articulate to followers what is desirable in terms of social, economic, cultural and
political development.

Political parties are considered as essential components for the formation and working
of the government with exception of few countries like Qatar, Saudi Arabia etc.
Political parties are necessary to help the institutions and processes of a government
democratic. They enable people to participate in elections and other processes of
governance, educate them and facilitate them to make policy choices.

Characteristics of a political party:

1. A political party is an organized group of people;
2. The organized group of people believes in common principles and common goals;
3. Its objectives revolve around seeking political power through collective efforts;
4. It employs constitutional and peaceful methods in seeking control over the
government through elections;
5. While in power, it translates its declared objectives into governmental policies.
6. Organized effort is necessary to the attainment of both the immediate and the
ultimate objectives of a party. Without some sort of organization, parties stand little
chance of winning control of the government and of directing its activities along
desired lines
7. As a party it demonstrates the will to consistently take part in the political
representation of the people during elections.
8. A party is an independent and permanent organisation; it shall not be formed only
for one election and cease to exist afterwards.
9. A party has individual memberships, so that the prospects of success remain clear.

Functions of Political Parties:

Political parties perform a variety of functions which are of primary significance in
the process of government:
1.They articulate and aggregate social interests: Parties express public expectations
and demands of social groupings to the political system (= function of political
opinion-making).
2. They recruit political personnel and nurture future generations of politicians: They
select persons and present them as candidates for elections (= function of selection).

56
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

3. They develop political programmes: Parties integrate various interests into a

general political project and transform it into a political programme, for which they
campaign to receive the consent and support of a majority (= function of integration).
4. They promote the political socialisation and participation of citizens: Parties
create a link between citizens and the political system; they enable political
participation of individuals and groupings with the prospect of success. (= function of
socialization and participation).
5. They organise the government. They participate in elections to occupy political
charges. Normally in party democracies, a good part of government authorities arise
from political parties (= function of exercising political power).
6. They contribute to the legitimacy of the political system: in establishing the
connection between citizens, social groupings and the political system, the parties
contribute in anchoring the political order in the consciousness of the citizens and in
social forces (= function of legitimating).

The importance of parties in a democracy

They specialize in doing many things that need to be done in connection with the
operation of governments.
1. Authoritarian regimes usually tolerate only one party, if any, and that serves as an
instrument of the ruling oligarchy or of an autocratic leader. They may in fact be a
menace to the survival of authoritarianism and that is why freedom to organize them is
likely to be denied or severely curtailed.
2. Without political parties effective popular control of the government probably
would be unattainable in politically organized communities of any significant size. In
their absence, the individual voter, acting alone, stands little chance of exerting an
influence on the formulation and adoption of governmental policy.
3. Political parties endeavor to mobilize majorities in support of their leaders and
programmes. Their sponsorship of policies and candidates promotes development of
widespread backing for specific solutions of social problems.
4. Competition among them gives meaning to elections.
5. The danger of parties to democracy lies in the subordination of public interest to
considerations of party survival and success. The practices of many parties often have
been harmful from the standpoint of the requirements of good government, for
example, spoils systems, election frauds, or corrupt deals with private interest.
Unscrupulous politicians frequently have used parties to enrich themselves or to
satisfy a personal lust for power and this is most characteristic of most African
political leaders.

Difference between Political parties and Pressure groups

Pressure groups are different from political parties. Political parties seek to create
change by being elected to public office, while pressure groups attempt to influence
political parties. Pressure groups may be better able to focus on specialized issues,
whereas political parties tend to address a wide range of issues.

57
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

While some pressure groups are linked to particular political parties, there are many
which have no linkage to any political party. It is important to understand that the
pressure groups are different from political parties. The distinction between the two
can be stated as under:
1. Pressure groups are not primarily political in nature. For example, although
Rashtriya Swayamak Sangh (RSS) supports the Bharatiya Janata Party, it is, by and
large, a cultural organization. The political parties are basically political.
2. Pressure groups do not seek direct power; they only influence those who are in
power for moulding decisions in their favour. The political parties seek power to form
the government.
3. Pressure groups do not contest elections; they only support political parties of their
choice. Political parties nominate candidates, contest elections, and participate in
election campaigns.
4. Pressure groups do not necessarily have political ideologies. Political parties are
always wedded to their ideologies. For example, the Congress party is wedded to the
ideologies of socialism, secularism and democracy; the Communists advocate the
interests of workers, peasants and other weaker sections.
5. The interests of the pressure groups areusually specific and particular, whereas
the political parties have policies and programmes with national and international
ramifications.
6. Pressure groups resort to agitations, demonstrations etc., to get their demands
implemented. To achieve their aim political parties use constitutional means.
7. The membership of pressure groups is limited whereas the membership of
political parties is very broad based. l Pressure groups are an informal institution.
Political parties are a formal institution.

Nation
Montserrat Guibernau, an English sociologist has defined the nation as ‘a human
group conscious of forming a community, sharing a common culture, attached to a
clearly demarcated territory, having a common past and a common project for the
future and claiming the right to rule itself’.

A nation is a group of people who see themselves as a cohesive unit based on shared
cultural or historical criteria. Nations are socially constructed units, not given by
nature. Their existence, definition, and members can change dramatically based on
circumstances. Nations in some ways can be thought of as ―imagined communities‖
that are bound together by notions of unity that can pivot around religion, ethnic
identity, language, cultural practice and so forth. The concept and practice of a nation
work to establish who belongs and who does not (insider vs. outsider). Such
conceptions often ignore political boundaries such that a single nation may “spill
over” into multiple states. Further, states ≠ nations: not every nation has a state (e.g.,
Kurds; Roma; Palestine). Some states may contain parts of multiple nations.

58
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

All modern nation-states adopt a national flag that represents the nation

The modern concept of the nation emerged during the Age of Revolution, the
American Revolution of 1776 and the French Revolution of 1789. In America
political discourse did not emphasize the unitary aspect of nationalism - the
Americans were concerned with the inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of
happiness, with the proper relation between the American union and the states and
with development of a liberal capitalist society. By contrast in France the nation was
conceived as "one and indivisible". The idea of the nation was inextricably linked up
with mass participation, citizenship and collective sovereignty of the people or of a
given nationality.

Eric Hobsbawm draws a distinction between the revolutionary democratic and the
nationalist conception of the nation. In the revolutionary democratic view of the
nation the sovereign citizen people within a state constituted a nation in relation to
others whereas in the nationalist view the "prior existence" of some distinguishing
features of a community, setting it apart from others, was necessary to constitute a
nation.

Nationalism
Joseph Stalin in his Marxism and the National Question, argued that "A nation is a
historically constituted, stable community of people, formed on the basis of common
language, territory, economic life and psychological make-up manifested in a common
culture".

According to Hans Khon, modem nationalism originated in Europe in the seventeenth

and eighteenth centuries. In the nineteenth century, it became a general European
movement and in the twentieth, it has become one of the most explosive political
philosophies that rule the world today.

59
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

He defines the concept as ‗a state of mind, in which the supreme loyalty of the
individual is felt to be due to the nation state‘. Kohn further adds that ‗it is living and
active corporate will. It is this will which we call nationalism, a state of mind inspiring
the large majority of people and claiming to inspire all its members. It asserts that the
nation-state is the ideal and the only legitimate form of political organization and that
the nationality is the source of all cultural creative energy and economic well-being‘.
The supreme loyalty of man is, therefore due to his nationality, as his own life is
supposedly rooted in and made possible by its welfare.

Nationalism is a doctrine which provides a rationale for a group of people to enjoy a

government exclusively of their own and exercise full sovereign rights. It presupposes
that mankind is divided into national compartments, each of which can be
distinguished by certain common characteristics. Patriotism, based on natural
attachments to native soil, had always existed in one form or the other from time
immemorial. Feeling of personal identification with some political entity too has been
known to humanity. Nationalism is fusion of these two very old feelings of emotional
attachment.

State
A State is an independent, sovereign government exercising control over a certain
spatially defined and bounded area, whose borders are usually clearly defined and
internationally recognized by other states.
1. States are tied to territory
 Sovereign or state as absolute ruler over territory
 Have clear borders
 Defends and controls its territory within those borders
 Is recognized by other countries (diplomatic recognition, passports, treaties,
etc.)
2. States have bureaucracies staffed by state‘s own personnel (government)
 Has a national bureaucracy staffed by government personnel (legal system,
educational system, hierarchical governmental units, etc.)
3. States monopolize certain functions within its territory (sovereign)
 Controls legitimate use of force within its territory
 Controls money at national scale (prints currency; collects taxes)
 Makes rules within its territory (law, regulations, taxes, citizenship, etc.)
 Controls much information within its territory
4. Population
 Population can constitute a state only when it is united by the condition of
interdependence, consciousness of common interest, and general regard for a
set of common rules of behaviour and institutions.

States try to form nations within their borders (through symbols, education, ‗national

60
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

interest,‘ etc.).

Today we think of the nation-state as the form of modern political life. A nation-state
is a political unit whose boundaries are co-extensive with a society, that is, with a
cultural, linguistic or ethnic nation. Politics is the sphere of activity involved in
running the state. As Max Weber defines it, politics is the activity of ―striving to share
power or striving to influence the distribution of power, either among states or among
groups within a state‖. This might be too narrow a way to think about politics,
however, because it often makes it appear that politics is something that only happens
far away in ―the state.‖ It is a way of giving form to politics that takes control out of
the hands of people.

In fact, the modern nation-state is a relatively recent political form. Foraging societies
had no formal state institution, and prior to the modern age, feudal Europe was
divided into a confused patchwork of small overlapping jurisdictions. Feudal secular
authority was often at odds with religious authority. Germany, for example, did not
become a unified state until 1871. Prior to 1867, most of the colonized territory that
became Canada was owned by one of the earliest corporations: the Hudson‘s Bay
Company. It was not governed by a state at all. If politics is the means by which form
is given to the life of a people, then it is clear that this is a type of activity that has
varied throughout history. Politics is not exclusively about the state or a property of
the state.

The modern state is based on the principle of sovereignty and the sovereign state
system. Sovereignty is the political form in which a single, central ―sovereign‖ or
supreme lawmaking authority governs within a clearly demarcated territory. The
sovereign state system is the structure by which the world is divided up into separate
and indivisible sovereign territories. At present there are 193 member states in the
United Nations (United Nations 2013). The entire globe is thereby divided up into
separate states except for the oceans and Antarctica.

The modem state is largely identified as the nation-state. The state has acquired its
present form through a long historical process extending over thousands of years. The
state itself was the product of the interplay of several factors, including kinship,
religion, property, war, technical development, and political consciousness. The
family was the first institution to emerge from the state of savagery, which brought
some sense of attachment, obligation, order and security, in the life of man.
Originally, man‘s family was traced from the mother which gave rise to the
matriarchal family. This, in due course, gave way to the patriarchal family when
woman was reduced to being the property of man. The family gave rise to a larger
social organization. Initially, kinship or blood-relationship provided a strong tie for
people to live together and to fulfil their needs through division of labour. In due
course, some consistent patterns of behaviour and relationships of domination and
subordination emerged. Social life came to be regulated by custom and authority. This

61
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

eventually led to the evolution of the state.

Nation-State
Anthony Smith, one of the most influential scholars of nation-states and nationalism,
argued that a state is a nation-state only if and when a single ethnic and cultural
population inhabits the boundaries of a state, and the boundaries of that state are
coextensive with the boundaries of that ethnic and cultural population. This is a very
narrow definition that presumes the existence of the ―one nation, one state‖ model.

A wider working definition, a nation-state is a type of state that conjoins the political
entity of a state to the cultural entity of a nation, from which it aims to derive its
political legitimacy to rule and potentially its status as a sovereign state if one accepts
the declarative theory of statehood as opposed to the constitutive theory. A state is
specifically a political and geopolitical entity, while a nation is a cultural and
ethnic one. The term ―nation-state‖ implies that the two coincide, in that a state has
chosen to adopt and endorse a specific cultural group as associated with it. The
concept of a nation-state can be compared and contrasted with that of the
multinational state, city-state, empire, confederation, and other state formations with
which it may overlap. The key distinction is the identification of a people with a polity
in the nation-state.

Most commonly, the idea of a nation-state was and is associated with the rise of the
modern system of states, often called the ―Westphalian system‖ in reference to the
Treaty of Westphalia (1648). The balance of power that characterized that system
depended on its effectiveness upon clearly defined, centrally controlled, independent
entities, whether empires or nation-states, that recognized each other‘s sovereignty
and territory. The Westphalian system did not create the nation-state, but the nation-
state meets the criteria for its component states.

Modern states, nations and nationalism are all territorial in the sense that their claims
are based on specific geographical areas. In the 19th century, the idea spread that the
state and the nation should "coincide geographically in the nation state". The modern
state is often called the "territorial state" since it has a clearly demarcated territory in
which it claims sovereign rights over all its citizens. Nationalism is a territorial
ideology which is internally unifying and externally divisive. As an ideology
nationalism discourages conflicts based on social class or status within a nation but
enhances the differences between different peoples and nations.

Characteristics of Nation-States:
1. They typically have a more centralized and uniform public administration than their
imperial predecessors because they are smaller and less diverse.
2. Creation of a uniform national culture through state policy.
3. When the implied unity was absent, the nation-state often tried to create it.

62
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Citizenship

Protests against National Register of Citizens in Assam (above) brought into focus the concept of
citizenship.

Citizenship can be defined as membership of a political community with certain rights

and obligations broadly acknowledged and shared in common. The membership that
citizens enjoy is both passive and active. Considered passively, citizens are entitled to
certain rights and obligations without their conscious involvement in shaping them.
But citizenship also involves active engagement in the civic and political life of
communities and this is reflected in the rights and obligations related to it.

Citizenship rights are universal in the sense that they pertain to all citizens and in all
relevant respects. They are sought to be implemented accordingly. Universality of
rights need not preclude enjoyment of group-related rights and to the extent that
citizens belong to relevant groups, they are increasingly conceded such rights.
Minorities and disadvantaged groups in many societies do enjoy certain special rights.
However, often equal rights of citizens are seen as running into conflict with group-
rights and cultural belonging of subgroups.A citizen has given access to many rights
which aliens do not enjoy. Aliens become naturalised as citizens with attendant rights
and obligations.

T M Marshall in his book Citizenship and Social Class, saw the development of
Citizenship in evolutionary terms- from acquiring the rights to free speech, worship,
property ownership and justice in eighteenth century via securing of the right to vote
and stand for office that is political rights.

It existed even in the times of the Greeks and the Romans. Aristotle in his book
Politics said that man is a social animal and for the development of his personality he

63
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

needs to participate in affairs of the polis. By this he hinted at the need for a
citizenship of man and various discourses have been made since on the concept of
citizenship. Greeks saw citizenship as the enjoyment of the right of sharing in the
deliberative or judicial office. The Romans citizenship guaranteed the right to vote,
eligibility for public office, right to intermarriage, etc.

Citizenship for Marshall is a status bestowed on those who are full members of a
community. Those who possess this status are equal with respect to the rights and
duties that come with it. However, there is no universal principle that determines what
those rights and duties shall be. Marshall divides citizenship into three parts: Civil,
Political and Social.

The civil element is composed of the rights necessary for individual freedom, like
personal liberty, freedom of speech, right to own property, freedom of thought etc.
The institutions most directly associated with civil rights are the courts of justice. It
also includes the right to work i.e. to follow the occupation of one‘s choice, something
that was denied by both statutes and customs. With civil citizenship, law and equality
were guaranteed to protect the liberty of the people, whether it was right to work, right
to move freely etc. Civil citizenship paved the way to move towards political
citizenship.

The political element mainly consists of the rights to participate in the exercise of
political power as a member of the body that embodies political authority; to vote; to
seek and support political leadership; to marshal support to political authority
upholding justice and equality and to struggle against an unfair political authority. The
political element made its appearance in the nineteenth century when the civil rights
attached to the status of freedom was already at the core of a general idea of
citizenship. Universal suffrage marked the beginning of political citizenship to
individuals; however, Marshall asserted that political franchise was not one of the
rights of citizenship but actually a privilege of the limited economic class.

The social element consists of a whole range of claims involving a degree of

economic welfare and security; the right to share in full the social heritage and to live
the life due to one as per the standards prevailing in one‘s society. The social
dimension also involves the right to culture which entitles one to pursue a way of life
distinctive to oneself. The institutions of the educational system and the social
services most closely connected with it.

Marshall‘s Citizenship theory, although seen as pioneering, has been the forefront of
many critiques:
1. Marxist critics considers idea as superficial as it does not highlight, a citizen‘s right
to control economic production, which has been argued as a necessity for continual
shared affluence.
2. Feminist perspectives contends Marshall‘s theory as being extremely confined in

64
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

being solely on men, while not acknowledging, the social rights of women.
3. Charles Tilly says Marshall did not discussed other aspects of society including
second class citizens and gender and racial hierarches.

Democracy
Democracy is rule by the people. Democracy however is not a static political form.
Three key elements constitute democracy as a dynamic system: the institutions of
democracy (parliament, elections, constitutions, rule of law, etc.), citizenship (the
internalized sense of individual dignity, rights, and freedom that accompanies formal
membership in the political community), and the public sphere (or open ―space‖ for
public debate and deliberation). On the basis of these three elements, rule by the
people can be exercised through a process of democratic will formation.

Jürgen Habermas emphasizes that democratic will formation in both direct and
representative democracy is reached through a deliberative process. The general will
or decisions of the people emerge through the mutual interaction of citizens in the
public sphere. The underlying norm of the democratic process is what Habermas calls
the ideal speech situation. An ideal speech situation is one in which every individual
is permitted to take part in public discussion equally: to question assertions and
introduce ideas. Ideally no individual is prevented from speaking (not by arbitrary
restrictions on who is permitted to speak, nor by practical restrictions on participation
like poverty or lack of education). To the degree that everyone accepts this norm of
openness and inclusion, in free debate the best ideas will ―rise to the top‖ and be
accepted by the majority. On the other hand, when the norms of the ideal speech
situation are violated, the process of democratic will formation becomes distorted and
open to manipulation.

In practice democratic will formation in representative democracies takes place

largely through political party competition in an electoral cycle. Two factors explain
the dynamics of democratic party systems. Firstly, political demand refers to the
underlying societal factors and social changes that create constituencies of people with
common interests. People form common political preferences and interests on the
basis of their common positions in the social structure. For example, changes in the
types of jobs generated by the economy will affect the size of electoral support for
labour unions and labour union politics. Secondly, political supply refers to the
strategies and organizational capacities of political parties to deliver an appealing

65
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

political program to particular constituencies. For example, the Liberal Parties across
globe often attempts to develop policies and political messaging that will position it in
the middle of the political spectrum where the largest group of voters potentially
resides.

Political leadership has to listen to the people in a democracy

The most common system that is deemed democratic in the modern world is
parliamentary democracy in which the voting public takes part in elections and
chooses politicians to represent them in a legislative assembly. The members of the
assembly then make decisions with a majority vote. A purer form is direct democracy
in which the voting public makes direct decisions or participates directly in the
political process. Elements of direct democracy exist on a local level and in exceptions
on the national level in many countries, although these systems coexist with
representative assemblies.

Democracies rest upon the principle that government exists to serve the people. In
other words, the people are citizens of the democratic state, not its subjects. Because
the state protects the rights of its citizens, they, in turn, give the state their loyalty.
Under an authoritarian system, by contrast, the state demands loyalty and service from
its people without any reciprocal obligation to secure their consent for its actions.
Other essential elements to democracy include freedom of political expression,
freedom of speech, and freedom of the press, so that citizens are adequately informed
and able to vote according to their own best interests as they see them. The term
―democracy‖ is often used as shorthand for liberal democracy, which may include
elements such as political pluralism, equality before the law, the right to petition
elected officials for redress of grievances, due process, civil liberties, human rights,
and elements of civil society outside the government.

66
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

According to some theories of democracy, popular sovereignty is the founding

principle of such a system. However, the democratic principle has also been expressed
as ―the freedom to call something into being which did not exist before, which was not
given and which therefore, strictly speaking, could not be known.‖ This type of
freedom, which is connected to human natality, or the capacity to begin anew, sees
democracy as ―not only a political system but an ideal, an aspiration, really, intimately
connected to and dependent upon a picture of what it is to be human—of what it is a
human should be to be fully human.‖

Core Democratic Characteristics

 Democracy is government in which power and civic responsibility are
exercised by all adult citizens, directly, or through their freely elected
representatives.
 Democracy rests upon the principles of majority rule and individual rights.
Democracies guard against all-powerful central governments and decentralize
government to regional and local levels, understanding that all levels of
government must be as accessible and responsive to the people as possible.
 Democracies understand that one of their prime functions is to protect such
basic human rights as freedom of speech and religion; the right to equal
protection under law; and the opportunity to organize and participate fully in
the political, economic, and cultural life of society.
 Democracies conduct regular free and fair elections open to citizens of voting
age.
 Citizens in a democracy have not only rights, but also the responsibility to
participate in the political system that, in turn, protects their rights and
freedoms.
 Democratic societies are committed to the values of tolerance, cooperation, and
compromise. In the words of Mahatma Gandhi, Intolerance is itself a form of
violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit.

Majority Rule and Minority Rights

All democracies are systems in which citizens freely make political decisions by
majority rule. In the words of American essayist E.B. White: Democracy is the
recurrent suspicion that more than half the people are right more than half the time.
But majority rule, by itself, is not automatically democratic. No one, for example,
would call a system fair or just that permitted 51 percent of the population to oppress
the remaining 49 percent in the name of the majority. In a democratic society,
majority rule must be coupled with guarantees of individual human rights that, in turn,
serve to protect the rights of minorities and dissenters - whether ethnic, religious, or
simply the losers in political debate. The rights of minorities do not depend upon the
good will of the majority and cannot be eliminated by majority vote. The rights of
minorities are protected because democratic laws and institutions protect the rights of
all citizens.

67
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Minorities need to trust the government to protect their rights and safety. Once this is
accomplished, such groups can participate in, and contribute to their country s
democratic institutions. The principle of majority rule and minority rights
characterizes all modern democracies, no matter how varied in history, culture,
population, and economy.

Pluralism and Democratic Society

In a democracy, government is only one thread in the social fabric of many and varied
public and private institutions, legal forums, political parties, organizations, and
associations. This diversity is called pluralism, and it assumes that the many organized
groups and institutions in a democratic society do not depend upon government for
their existence, legitimacy, or authority. Most democratic societies have thousands of
private organizations, some local, some national. Many of them serve a mediating role
between individuals and society s complex social and governmental institutions,
filling roles not given to the government and offering individuals opportunities to
become part of their society without being in government.

In an authoritarian society, virtually all such organizations would be controlled,

licensed, watched, or otherwise accountable to the government. In a democracy, the
powers of the government are, by law, clearly defined and sharply limited. As a result,
private organizations are largely free of government control. In this busy private realm
of democratic society, citizens can explore the possibilities of peaceful self-fulfillment
and the responsibilities of belonging to a community - free of the potentially heavy
hand of the state or the demand that they adhere to views held by those with influence
or power, or by the majority.

Civil Society
Civil society refers to the space for collective action around shared interests, purposes
and values, generally distinct from government and commercial for-profit actors. Civil
society includes charities, development NGOs, community groups, women's
organizations, faith-based organizations, professional associations, trade unions, social
movements, coalitions and advocacy groups. However civil society is not
homogeneous and the boundaries between civil society and government or civil
society and commercial actors can be blurred. There is certainly no one 'civil society'
view, and civil society actors need to contend with similar issues of representativeness
and legitimacy as those of other representatives and advocates.

Despite its complexity and heterogeneity, the inclusion of civil society voices is
essential to give expression to the marginalised and those who often are not heard.
Civil society actors can enhance the participation of communities in the provision of
services and in policy decision-making. One of the most striking developments in
recent decades has been the emergence of internationally based nongovernmental
organizations (NGOs). In attempting to serve the needs of a community, nation, or

68
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

cause, which may be defined globally, these NGOs try to supplement or even
challenge the work of the government by advocating, educating, and mobilizing
attention around major public issues and monitoring the conduct of government and
private enterprise. Governments and NGOs frequently work as partners. NGOs may
provide expertise and personnel on the ground for implementation of government-
funded projects. NGOs may be politically unaffiliated, or they may be based on
partisan ideals and seek to advance a particular cause or set of causes in the public
interest. In either model the key point is that NGOs operate under minimal political
control of states.
Nonprofit organizations, like other groups and institutions in modern societies, operate
within and are conditioned by three types of systems: economic, political, and social.
Nonprofits themselves, in turn, give group members the opportunity to exercise three
fundamental civic principles: participatory engagement, constitutional authority,
and moral responsibility.

Principles of Civil Society

The literature suggests that the three principles–participatory engagement,
constitutional authority, and moral responsibility–are found in all civil societies
regardless of cultural context.

Participatory engagement indicates that members of the society (1) enjoy access to
and governance of resources used for the common good, (2) are free to be involved in
civic action and social change, and (3) are free to participate in group affiliations that
provide a sense of belonging on a community level.

Constitutional authority protects the rights and privileges of citizens in a civil society.
Under the rule of law, citizens and social groups are constitutionally legitimized and
empowered to hold economic and political actors accountable for their work as
community servants and trustees. Local and national decision-makers, motivated by
the common good rather than self-interest, are expected to design and implement
public policies that strengthen the vitality and welfare of the community.

Within this social context, all community members have moral responsibility to use
their civil liberties in ways that do not violate the human rights of others. The practice
of equity, justice, and reciprocity produces social order and stability.

Characteristics of Civil Society

Civil society is advanced when citizens share a social right of access to the resources
produced, used, and exchanged through natural and social economies in a community
and through a society. Access, in this context, includes the abilities both to contribute
to the resources and to benefit from them.

Community-based civic engagement: in economic activities occurs in the arena of

69
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

what is historically called ―the Commons,‖ as in the Greek agora and the English
market. As citizens participate in the open exchange of commonwealth resources, they
can form and strengthen social connections and networks with others.
Decentralized: citizens can exercise their civic duty of self-governance by
participating in political structures that exhibit decentralized power and authority.
Community-based civic engagement in political governance exists when community
members have the opportunity to hold positions or ―offices‖ of public decision-
making and leadership.
Associations: refers to those social places where people gather and interact with
others to exchange ideas, offer support, and receive a sense of belonging. Community-
based civic engagement in systems of social exchange exists when diverse social
groups and gatherings are present and permeable.
Trusteeship: citizens hold decision-making power, work to strengthen and improve
local and regional economies, and exercise sustainable and socially transparent
stewardship of societal resources (e.g., human, social, material, and ecological) on
behalf of the ―common good.‖ Community-based activities of civic responsibility in
systems of economic development exist when citizens enjoy the legitimate authority
of resource trusteeship.
Sovereignty: The presence and legitimacy of community-based civic authority
through systems of political governance increase the ability of citizens to exercise
sovereignty over policies and programs that can positively affect their lives and the
quality of life in their community.
Accountability: basic civic freedoms and rights (e.g., fair elections, free speech, a
free press providing access to information, freedom to organize in groups) to hold
economic and political actors responsible for the outcomes of policies, programs and
patterns of resource distribution, and the exercise of political power.
Equity: each citizen is given equitable access to and use of resources required for
constructing a satisfying and satisficing life. Economic equity of resources is
necessary for producing and sustaining an improved quality of life for all people,
especially the poor.
Justice: citizens pursue social justice by (1) consistently and compassionately using
the ―rule of law‖ in fulfillment of their civic obligations, and (2) advocating for those
excluded from the political process and harmed by unjust laws.
Reciprocity: citizens (1) pursue social transformation through reciprocal, mutually
dependent collaboration with others, and (2) negotiate, mediate, and resolve conflict
through peaceful, nonviolent means.

The principles and systems of civil society must move beyond the nation-state to
include a global political economy of relations and groups. Everyone is to be viewed
as one another‘s neighbor; we are mutually responsible for everyone‘s opportunity to
experience a satisfying and satisficing life. Our global economy, having brought us
together, pushes us to develop appropriate political and social systems through which
participation, authority, and responsibility can be just, equitable, and nonviolent–
responding with concern for the disenfranchised, marginalized, and impoverished.

70
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Ideology
An ideology is a set of ideas that constitute one‘s goals, expectations, and actions. An
ideology can be thought of as a comprehensive vision, as a way of looking at things,
as in several philosophical tendencies, or a set of ideas proposed by the dominant class
of a society to all members of this society. The main purpose behind an ideology is to
offer either change in society, or adherence to a set of ideals where conformity already
exists, through a normative thought process. Ideologies are systems of abstract
thought applied to public matters and thus make this concept central to politics.

In the Marxist account of ideology, it serves as an instrument of social reproduction.

In the Marxist economic base and superstructure model of society, base denotes the
relations of production, and superstructure denotes the dominant ideology (religious,
legal, political systems). The economic base of production determines the political
superstructure of a society. Ruling class-interests determine the superstructure and the
nature of the justifying ideology—actions feasible because the ruling class control the
means of production. Similarly, Louis Althusser proposed a materialistic conception
of ideology using the concept of the ideological state apparatus. For Althusser, beliefs
and ideas are the products of social practices, not the reverse. What is ultimately
important for Althusser are not the subjective beliefs held in the ―minds‖ of human
individuals, but rather the material institutions, rituals, and discourses that produce
these beliefs.

Many political parties base their political action and program on an ideology. A
political ideology is a certain ethical set of ideals, principles, doctrines, myths, or
symbols of a social movement, institution, class, or large group that explains how
society should work and offers some political and cultural blueprint for a certain
social order. A political ideology largely concerns itself with how to allocate power
and to what ends it should be used. Some parties follow a certain ideology very
closely, while others may take broad inspiration from a group of related ideologies
without specifically embracing any one of them.
Ideology may be based on political, economic or religious elements. Sometimes,
ethnic and cultural elements also may provide the necessary basis for ideology.
Democracy is a political ideology, communism is an economic ideology and
theocracy is a religious ideology.

Marxist Ideology
Communism is the best example of an ideology which extends to political and other
fields. Communism is against religion and, at least in the early stages, calls for a
totalitarian social structure. However, communism as an ideology in its purest form,
as visualized by Karl Marx, has not been found in practice, anywhere in the world.

According to Marx, ideology emerges out of a society's mode of production. In his

case and in that of the modern United States, the economic mode of production is

71
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

capitalism. Marx's approach to ideology was set forth in his theory of base and
superstructure. According to Marx, the superstructure of society, the realm of
ideology, grows out of the base, the realm of production, to reflect the interests of the
ruling class and justify the status quo that keeps them in power. Marx, then, focused
his theory on the concept of a dominant ideology.

Rightist Ideology
Right ideology can be defined as one end of the political ideology spectrum which is
characteristically defined by the notions of nationalism, authority, hierarchy, and
traditionalism. There are various categories that are utilised to define the right
ideology like conservatives right- imperialists, fascists and traditionalists each
displaying varying amount fright wing politics and upholding those beliefs. For
example- Germany under Hitler‘s rule displayed fascism which curtailed rights
extremely and let one man be at the helm of all power. On the other hand, the
Republicans of America are often compared with being traditionalists due to their
belief in the norms of Christianity and the Church.

Its economic features can be defined by encouraging the least possible intervention

72
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

by the government in economic markets and encouraging a laissez-faire economy

where the individual takes up the onus to conduct their own transactions within
minimal to absolutely no state intervention. For example- if a person wants to be
involved in trade and conduct their own business and earn profits it is their discretion
how they choose to start the business and build its customer base.

Leftist Ideology
Left ideology entails the principles of freedom equality, reform, and internationalism.
Economically, the left ideology stands for central planning and adequate government
intervention ensuring a welfare state and protectionism.

Culturally, the left ideology aligns with the fact that there should be a sense of
progression and equality. For example- the several pride marches and LGBTQ+
movements are supported by most of the left parties across the world.

Centrist Ideology
Centrist ideology falls somewhere in the middle of the spectrum. It aims to highlight
the pros and the cons of both extreme ideologies and tries to define itself through
moderation. Centrism only arises from a very relational context and arises to strike a
balance between the two extreme ideologies.

Ideology provides
 A course of action (sometimes even a revolution to overthrow and replace the
existing social order)
 Collective mobilization in the social movement.
 Legitimacy to the process of interest articulation organized collective action.
 Conjuncture of discourse and power
 A medium in which conscious social actors make sense of their world.
 A particular pattern of social relationships and arrangements
 Establishment of political identities

Ideology in the stricter sense stays fairly close to Destutt de Tracy's original
conception and may be identified by five characteristics:
 It contains an explanatory theory of a more or less comprehensive kind about
human experience and the external world;
 It sets out a program, in generalized and abstract terms, of social and political
organization;
 It conceives the realization of this program as entailing a struggle;
 It seeks not merely to persuade but to recruit loyal adherents, demanding what
is sometimes called commitment;
 It addresses a wide public but may tend to confer some special role of
leadership on intellectuals

73
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Karl Popper, in his book ‗Open Society and its Enemies‘, indicates that every
ideology is totalitarian as it is blinded by ideological bias and hence indifferent to
plurality of viewpoints. Hence ideology is antithetical to objectivity.

Social Movements

From the very beginning, the discipline of sociology has been interested in social
movements. The French Revolution was the violent culmination of several
movements aimed at overthrowing the monarchy and establishing ‗liberty, equality
and fraternity‘. In Britain, the industrial revolution was marked by great social
upheaval. The history of human civilization is marked by ―dissents‖ and ―protests‖
within human relationships and human groups and also between civil and political
society. Dissent means disagreement or withholding assent. It has a negative
connotation i.e.; a dissenter is a non-conformist. During medieval period dissent was
considered as sacrilege. However, in democracy it acquired a new meaning carrying
the notion of radical and hence not conforming to the values that are either
―authoritatively‖ allocated by the state or practiced by the civil society.

Collective Action
Collective action refers to the action taken by a group (either directly or on its behalf
through an organization) in pursuit of members perceived shared interests. It seems
logical to expect that people who have an interest in common will act on it – for
example that pensioners will act for higher pensions or miners for greater underground
safety. Similarly, auto-rickshaw or taxi drivers for increase in fare, and ad-hoc
teachers for regularization of their services, etc.

According to Doug McAdam, ―collective action refers to emergent and minimally

coordinated action by two or more people that is motivated by a desire to change
some aspect of social life or to resist changes proposed by others.‖

By ―emergent‖ is meant innovative lines of action that depart from taken-for-granted

normative routines. ―Coordinated‖ simply means that the various parties to the
emerging conflict are attuned to one another and acting in awareness of this fact.
Finally, the emphasis on change or resistance to change is designed to capture the
adversarial or potentially conflictual nature of ―collective action.‖

While protest is the most visible form of collective action, a social movement also acts
in other, equally important, ways. Social movement activists hold meetings to
mobilize people around the issues that concern them. Such activities help shared
understanding, and also prepare for a feeling of agreement or consensus about how to
pursue the collective agenda

74
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Protests
Protest has been defined by Ralph H. Turner as ―an expression or declaration of
objection, disapproval, or dissent, often in opposition to something a person is
powerless to prevent or avoid.‖

Protestors at a rally

Protest is something more than dissent. It emerges out from dissent and is a concrete
form or expression of disapproval or objection. Protest and dissent are inseparable so
much so that without dissent, protest does not have any meaning. If both dissent and
protest form the basis of human organization into a group and with its own goal,
leadership, certain degree of motivation and political communication, it takes the
shape of a movement. Movements entail collective action to transform and change the
status quo. In a democratic society, such kinds of movements are referred to as ―social
movements‖ in general and since the later part of the twentieth century as ―new social
movements‖. These movements build upon various themes such as ecology, gender,
human rights and so on; present a kind of pattern that requires incisive analysis. The
protest is expressed against any form of domination and discrimination. The protest
movements are movements against unjust and unequal order in social, economic,
political or cultural form.

The term protest is sometimes applied to trivial and chronic challenges that are more
indicative of a reaction style than of deep grievance. For instance, we speak of a child
who protests every command from parent or teacher in the hope of gaining occasional
small concessions.

An act of protest includes the following elements: the action expresses a grievance, a
conviction of wrong or injustice; the protestors are unable to correct the condition
directly by their own efforts; the action is intended to draw attention to the grievances;
the action is further meant to provoke ameliorative steps by some target group; and the

75
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

protestors depend upon some combination of sympathy and fear to move the target
group in their behalf.

Agitation
Agitation is a social process that involves intense activity undertaken by an individual
or group in order to fulfill a purpose. Purpose is central to agitation. Agitation is
manifested through activities like strikes, mass leave, rioting and picketing. It can
either organized or unorganized and is generally non institutional. Agitations may also
aim to acquire power. Agitations are usually spontaneous.

Agitation and Protests

 Opposition and dissent is central in protest while a purpose and dissatisfaction
is central in an agitation
 While protest is a reaction to an event that has already occurred, an agitation
can also be a future occurrence against any event or incidence.
 The agitation and protest can be due to actual as well as relative deprivation of
agitators /protestors or their affiliate groups.
 Both protests and agitations can be institutionalized and become social
movements.

Revolution
Revolution has been central to the formation of the modern world. The word itself
refers to radical, transformative change and has many generic uses describing
phenomena from the ―industrial revolution‖ to the ―sexual revolution.‖ As a historical
process, ―revolution‖ refers to a movement, often violent, to overthrow an old regime
and effect complete change in the fundamental institutions of society. After the
French Revolution of the 18th century which deposed the monarchy and attempted to
refashion society from top to bottom, revolution became synonymous with the radical
overcoming of the past. Modernity, many came to believe, could only be achieved
through such violent and total transformation.

The inspiration for many 20th century revolutions was the Russian Revolution of 1917
led by Vladimir Lenin and inspired by the ideas of Marxist Communism. Marx
believed that revolution was necessary to move societies from one historical stage to
the next, and his formulation strengthened the perception of revolution as a universal
and inevitable process in world history. For over a half century, the Russian
Revolution provided would-be revolutionaries throughout the world with a model for
political revolution and socio-economic transformation. The Soviet Union‘s example
was especially inspirational to anti-colonial and nationalist revolutionaries, from
China‘s Sun Yat Sen to Vietnam‘s Ho Chi Minh, who saw in the experience of the
USSR solutions to the dilemmas of their own countries.

For a revolution to succeed it builds upon a very strong ideology which not

76
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

necessarily but quite often lead to armed struggle and grabs power from the existing
authority.

Ideology
Ideas play a critical part in all revolutions. Those who seek change are motivated by
new ideas about politics, economics or society.

Revolutionary ideas are developed, adapted and articulated by important writers and
thinkers, such as Jefferson and Paine in America, the philosophes in France and Marx
in Russia. These ideas promote revolution, explain their objectives and justify their
actions.

In the American and French revolutions, for example, old ideas about monarchy and
the ‗divine right of kings‘ were challenged by Enlightenment ideas of self-government
and republicanism. The revolutions in Russia and China were underpinned first by
liberal republicanism, then later by Marxist socialism.

Revolutions often involve a struggle of ideas between the old order and the
revolutionaries – or indeed between different revolutionary factions.

Armed Struggle
Revolutions, by their nature, are violent struggles between the old regime and those
who hope to remove it. Many revolutionaries prepare for armed struggle by forming
militias or armies, either to protect themselves or to overthrow the old order.
Meanwhile, the old regime mobilizes to defend its grip on power.

Eventually, the two forces will clash – such as at Lexington Concord (America, April
1775), the Bastille (France, July 1789) and the Winter Palace (Russia, October 1917).
This may lead to war.

If revolutionary war unfolds, society becomes polarized and individuals and regions
are forced to take sides. The outcomes of revolutionary war may be dispossession,
death and destruction.

A grab for power

Having openly demanded change and signaled their intention to fight, the
revolutionaries will seek to displace or overthrow the old order. Sometimes the old
regime is so weak that a transition of political power is made swiftly and with minimal
violence, such as in China (October 1911) and Russia (February-March 1917).

Sometimes the old regime may lose its political power gradually or incrementally, as

77
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

occurred in France in 1788-1789. There may be a period of military struggle or

attempted counter-revolution, as conservative forces resist political change and
attempt to restore the power of the old regime.

In recent years, with the dismantling of revolutionary regimes in the Soviet Union and
elsewhere and China‘s movement toward a market economy, some historians have
begun revising their understandings of revolution and its outcomes. Even in light of
these reevaluations, there can be no doubt about the importance of revolution — as
both a goal and historical process — to the formation of modern Asia and the modern
world.

Social Movements
A social movement is the mobilization of large numbers of people to work together to
deal with a social problem. It is a persistent and organized effort to either bring about
what participants believe to be beneficial social change or in some cases resist or
reverse change viewed as harmful.

Social movements can be classified in a number of ways. One can first consider
whether the movement intends to bring about or resist change:
1. An innovative (liberal) movement intends to introduce something new with regard
to culture, patterns of behavior, policies, or institutions. For example, a liberal
movement exists to legalize marijuana in many states in USA.
2. A conservative movement aims to maintain things the way they are. Such as the
movement to prevent legalization of marijuana where it remains illegal
3. Reactionary movements seek to resurrect cultural elements, patterns of behavior,
or institutions of the past. An example would be a movement that wants to return to
banning same-sex marriage.

Movements can also be classified in terms of which aspects of society are targeted for
change:
1. Reform movements call for change in patterns of behavior, culture and/or policy,
but do not try to replace whole social institutions. Movements involving civil rights,
women‘s rights, sexual orientation, and the rights of people with disabilities all call
for acceptance by the larger culture to ensure equal access to all social institutions but
do not aim to replace them.
2. Revolutionary movements in contrast, aim at bringing about great structural
change by replacing one or more major social institutions. French Revolution ended a
monarchy and established a republic. More contemporary examples of successful
revolutions include Bolshevik Revolution 1917, The Chinese Revolution 1948, the
1979 Iranian Revolution that replaced a monarchy with a fundamentalist Islamic
republic etc.

Social movements can also be classified as:

78
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

1. Identity Movements: These movements attempt to create a new identity for the
oppressed group ―that provides a sense of empowerment, pride, self-confidence and
equality‖ and also actively confront ―the larger public‘s norms, beliefs, behaviors, and
ways of thinking‖
2. New Social Movements: were concerned with moral and quality-of-life issues and
the establishment of new collective identities. Examples of new social movements
include peace movements and movements focusing on the environment, women‘s
rights, gay rights, and animal rights. Critics claim that this division is artificial,
because movements concerned with moral and quality-of-life issues coexisted with
workers‘ labor movements during the period of industrialization, and new social
movements often have economic as well as moral and identity goals.
3. Transnational Movements: are active in more than one country. Examples include
the women‘s, environmental and human rights movements, and movements promoting
democracy.

Theories of Social Movements

1.Absolute deprivation theory (McAdam, McCarthy, & Zald): social movements
develop when people are unable to obtain adequate food, shelter, or other basic needs.
However, history shows that people living in poverty over a period of generations
develop the cultural outlook that their situation is fated and unchangeable. Similarly,
the existence of wide gaps in wealth levels of groups in a society does not seem
sufficient to bring about social movements. Social movements, including
revolutionary movements, appear to develop not just as a result of deprivation or
inequality but because of expectations and moral beliefs concerning fairness and
social justice.
2.Resource Mobilization Theory (Jenkins): people motivated to create a social
movement must have access to necessary resources to succeed. This theory thus says
that when some individuals in a society have certain grievances, they may be able to
mobilize necessary resources to do something to alleviate those grievances. The term
"resources" in this context refer to things like money, labor, social status, knowledge,
support of the media and political elites, etc.
This theory does provide a good explanation of why some social movements have
been able to grow at an exponential rate, even in the presence of seemingly
insurmountable obstacles. The civil rights movement in the U.S. is a classic example
of this type.
3. Structural Strain Theory (Smelser): This theory advocates that any nascent social
movement needs six factors to grow. These six factors are:
i. Structural conduciveness. It is the underlying characteristics of a society that make
the development of a social movement possible and influence what type of movement
emerges. For example, if a government blocks all means of communication, it may be
difficult for a movement to emerge. The increased use of cell phones, played a major
role in the Arab Awakening protests in the winter and spring of 2011 that toppled
governments in Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya.
ii. Structural strain. Factors such as absolute or relative deprivation in terms of

79
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

expectations, aspirations, or moral ideals cause largescale discontent. In Tunisia and

other Arab nations that experienced massive explosions of protest in late 2010 and
2011, people became intensely frustrated by repressive dictatorships, brutal and
corrupt security forces, and limited economic opportunities.
iii. Growth and spread of a generalized belief (ideology). This is the development of a
shared common explanation for the cause of the condition generating discontent and a
belief that something can and should be done about it. In the Feminists Movements,
most people believed patriarchy to be the central cause of problem and that large-scale
protests to correct it.
iv. Precipitating factors These are events that confirm or justify the generalized
belief and provoke people to action. The self-immolation of a Delhi University student
in New Delhi led to nationwide protests against implementation of Mandal
Commission.
v. Mobilization Leaders encourage and organize movement supporters in mass
protests and related activities such as boycotts, petitions, campaigns for (or against)
certain political candidates, court battles, and other measures to achieve movement
goals.
vi. Operation of social control Depending on the movement, those with power in
society may support it, attempt to manipulate it by influencing one of the first five
factors, oppose it, or even attempt to violently repress it.

4. Political Process Theory

Social movements arise at times when political circumstances for their success are
favorable. In other words, people only initiate a social movement when they perceive
that the political climate will allow them to organize successfully and achieve their
goals. In addition, a social movement that is already underway will often attempt to
use its influence to make the political environment more favorable. For example,
Jayaprakash Narayan‘s Total Revolution rose in question to that of the state and that
of the power of the government in charge.

Different stages of Social Movements

Social movements are not eternal. They have a life cycle: they are created, they grow,
they achieve successes or failures and, eventually, they dissolve and cease to exist.
Charles Tilly defines social movements as a series of contentious performances,
displays and campaigns by which ordinary people make collective claims on others.
For Tilly, social movements are a major vehicle for ordinary people‘s participation in
public politics

Blumer, Mauss, and Tilly have described the different stages that social movements
often pass through. Firstly, movements emerge for a variety of reasons (and there are a
number of different sociological theories that address these reasons). They then
coalesce and develop a sense of coherence in terms of membership, goals and ideals.
In the next stage, movements generally become bureaucratized by establishing their
own set of rules and procedures. At this point, social movements can then take any

80
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

number of paths, ranging from success to failure, the cooptation of leaders, repression
by larger groups (e.g., government), or even the establishment of a movement within
the mainstream.
Let us study the stages of Social Movements with the help of Anti-War movement and
Civil Rights Movement in USA of 1960s.
a. Emergence: begins when a large number of people become distressed by a
particular situation. For example, during the 1960s the US government claimed that a
war of aggression was being waged against a small nation in Southeast Asia called
South Vietnam. Soon many college professors contradicted the government‘s story,
asserting that the war was a continuation of decades of Vietnamese resistance to
colonialism.

b.Coalescence: a social movement becomes more organized and develops resource-

gathering capabilities. Coalescence of the antiwar movement was facilitated by the
involvement of veterans of the civil rights movement, including Martin Luther King
Jr. He joined the antiwar movement and participated in the 1967, one of the largest
antiwar protest marches in U.S. history.
c. Bureaucratization: occurs when the government takes official notice of a
movement and tries to cope with it and the movement establishes one or more
geographically extensive or even national social movement organizations (SMOs). In
this stage the government typically addresses the movement in some way, ranging
from promising to investigate the problem that the movement is publicizing to
enacting policies or passing legislation to deal with it. In the case of the civil rights
movement, the U.S. government acted to bring about desegregation of public facilities
and schools and to combat racial discrimination in employment. In responding to the
antiwar movement, the government pledged to work for peace, entered into peace
negotiations.
d. Fragmentation or breaking of the movement: after a period of some success,
because movement participants disagree about whether essential goals have really
been achieved. Those who feel the movement‘s mission has not actually been
accomplished may propose new strategies, tactics, or actions.
e. Demise: Eventually a movement may meet its demise, or come to an end because it
has achieved its goal, lost popular support, or been repressed. For example, the

81
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

abolitionist movement lost its reason for existence upon slavery‗s elimination
following the Civil War. The conclusion of the Vietnam conflict in 1975 brought an
end to the antiwar movement.

Mauss noted that some movements that appeared to meet their demise did not totally
end but instead experienced revival, re-emerging in the same or a modified form. For
example, once the women‘s suffrage movement succeeded in obtaining the right for
women to vote in 1920, it appeared to decline for decades. But in the 1960s it began a
strong revival as the feminist movement, aimed at addressing a range of issues related
to economic, educational, sports, and military equality of opportunity for women.
More recently, some view the Black Lives Matter movement as a revival of the
1950s–1960s civil rights movement.
(A note to students: Apply these stages to few social movements happened in India,
for example Anna‘s movement of Anti-Corruption, Anti-CAA movement, etc.)

Social Movements and Social Change

Social movements often operate outside of the political system by engaging in protest.
Their rallies, demonstrations, sit-ins, and silent vigils are often difficult to ignore.
With the aid of news media coverage, these events often throw much attention on the
problem or grievance at the center of the protest and bring pressure to bear on the
government agencies, corporations, or other targets of the protest.

As noted earlier, there are many examples of profound changes brought about by
social movements in the history of Africa, U.S., and many European countries as well
as many Asian countries. The woman suffrage movement after the Civil War
eventually won women the right to vote with the ratification of the 19th Amendment
in 1920. The contemporary women‘s movement has won many rights in social
institutions throughout globe, while the gay rights movement has done the same for
gays and lesbians. Another contemporary movement is the environmental movement,
which has helped win legislation and other policies that have reduced air, water, and
ground pollution.

Although it seems obvious that social movements have made a considerable

difference, social movement scholars until recently have paid much more attention to
the origins of social movements than to their consequences Recent work has begun to
fill in this gap and has focused on the consequences of social movements for the
political system (political consequences), for various aspects of the society‘s culture
(cultural consequences), and for the lives of the people who take part in movements
(biographical consequences).

Regarding political consequences, scholars have considered such matters as whether

movements are more successful when they use more protest or less protest, and when
they focus on a single issue versus multiple issues. The use of a greater amount of
protest seems to be more effective in this regard, as does a focus on a single issue.

82
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Research has also found that movements are more likely to succeed when the
government against which they protest is weakened by economic or other problems.
In another line of inquiry, movement scholars disagree over whether movements are
more successful if their organizations are bureaucratic and centralized or if they
remain decentralized and thus more likely to engage in protest.

Regarding cultural consequences, movements often influence certain aspects of a

society‘s culture whether or not they intend to do so Social movements can affect
values and beliefs, and they can affect cultural practices such as music, literature, and
even fashion.

Movements may also have biographical consequences. Several studies find that
people who take part in social movements during their formative years (teens and
early 20s) are often transformed by their participation. Their political views change or
are at least reinforced, and they are more likely to continue to be involved in political
activity and to enter social change occupations. In this manner, people who have been
involved in social movement activities, even at a lower level of commitment, carry the
consequences of that involvement throughout their life.

83
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

RELIGION AND SOCIETY

Sociological Theories of Religion

Although the founding fathers of sociology, Marx, Durkheim, and Weber, did write
extensively on the topic, it generally lost favor in sociology studies with the rise of
secularism throughout the 19th and 20th centuries. Sociology had strived for so long, to
be considered a positive science. It was no wonder that the study of religion was often
avoided, with the focus remaining on more traditional sociological topics. The
prediction of early sociologists, including Marx and Weber, of religion taking a back
seat to science and eventual secularization of society has since then become greatly
disproved. With the realigned geopolitical boundaries of the new millennium, the rise
of Islam and Christianity throughout the world, and a steady development and
attendance of various religious denominations in America, it seems that the practice of
religion in the global society is not only alive, but thriving.

Over the past few decades it has moved out of the disciplines of religion and theology
and is being studied more and more as a specialized subsection of sociology. The
study of religion and society is important because it not only helps to explain
institutional practices and rituals, but also social attitudes and behavior. Although
religious rites and traditions are often divinely inspired, the institution itself is a social
process and observable for empirical research. The study of religion from a
sociological perspective strives to understand the role of worship in daily life and
culture, and its content still may encompass, although not focus exclusively on, other
traditional topics of sociological inquiry such as inequality, gender, race, class issues,
the life cycle and even politics and economics. It attempts to explain effects that
religion has on society while also looking at the effect of society on religion.

Marxist Theory of Religion

In his earlier writings, Marx wrote about his views on religion in his Critique of
Hegel’s Philosophy of Right 1843. Marx strongly felt that humans should be guided
by applied science, facts, and the use of reason. Religion, he felt went against this
concept with the use of faith and belief, which only masked the truth while misguiding
the person. Marx‘s view of man‘s labor in modernity stripped the individual of dignity
and self-worth by the division of labor. This division caused a separation of human
labor and the fruits or results of that labor, resulted in dehumanization, which in turn
led to internal alienation of the person within. The worth of a person became nothing
more than the price of a commodity. This alienation, Marx argued, was at the center of
social inequality in society. His antithesis to this alienation was freedom. The
purpose of religion was only to give an illusion and promise of a better life where
realistically there was little hope for one. Therefore, religion served only to uphold
the ideologies and cultural systems that fostered the capitalist economy, and give a
false sense of help and salvation.

84
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Marx famously termed religion as ‘the opium of the people’

Marx writes, ‗Man makes religion, religion does not make man. Religion is, indeed,
the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to
himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting
outside the world. Man is the world of man – state, society. This state and this society
produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an
inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopedic
compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d‘honneur, its enthusiasm, its
moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and
justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human
essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore,
indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion.

Religion is a sigh of the oppressed creature, the sentiment of a heartless world, and the
soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as
the illusionary happiness of men, is a demand for their real happiness. To call on them
to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition
that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism
of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.

Religion, Marx argued, served only the ruling class elite by diverting the masses
attention off of their own exploitation and situation of inequality. He viewed God as
being created in man‘s own image and in man‘s perception of what God should be.
His critique of religion was a call to people to abandon their illusions and philosophy,
he argued, had a critical role to play in exposing these illusions. The only next step he
saw was to acknowledge that there was no real God only nature and humanity. This
acceptance would encourage the individual to focus on their own personal
development rather than look to a God for help, and then philosophy should establish

85
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

that ideal of human fulfillment. In turn a classless society, which he predicted would
happen through revolution, would arise, and religion would become irrelevant and
unnecessary.

One major critique of Marx and conflict theory and its position on institutionalized
religion in society is that often in periods of positive change, concerning increased
equality, organized religion often plays major roles in mobilization of the masses, and
in getting heard in government. For instance, both the abolition of slavery in America
during the later part of 19th century and the civil rights movement in the later part of
the 20th century was heavily influenced by organized religion which aided the people
in getting their voice heard.

Functionalist Theory of Religion

Durkheim was one of the first Functionalist sociologists to write at length about the
role of religion in society. The reference to the "elementary forms" of religious life
means a concern with the basic, fundamental, aspects of all forms of religion and it is
here that we find the basis for Durkheim's analysis and understanding of the
development and role of religion in any society.

Praying together reinforces social bonds

For Durkheim, any analysis of the role of religious practice had to be formulated in
terms of the social purpose or function of religious activity (in simple terms, the
analysis of what religion does for the individual and, most importantly, society). In
this respect, he was primarily concerned with understanding religion in terms of the
way it served an integrating function in any society, rather than with an analysis of
specific differences in religious practice. He writes that there can be no society which
does not feel the need of upholding and reaffirming at regular intervals the collective
sentiments and the collective ideas which make its unity and personality...this moral

86
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

remaking cannot be achieved except by the means of reunions, assemblies and

meetings where the individuals, being closely united to one another, reaffirm in
common their common sentiments.

Religion is a very important source of cohesion and integration in society, since it

can provide people with such things as:
 Common values (a belief in some form of God),
 Common experiences (communal ceremonies, for example),
 Common interpretations (the world created by God, for example).

Durkheim used the fact that in any form of religious belief there is a distinction to be
made between the sacred (special symbols and ceremonies involved in overtly
religious activity and the profane (everyday ("non-sacred") life as it is separated from
religious activity). This distinction in all religions between the sacred (or special) and
the profane (or everyday) was significant because Durkheim could relate it to the
distinction between the individual and society. In this respect, the sacred symbolizes
society whilst the profane symbolizes the individual.

This distinction in all religions between the sacred (or special) and the profane (or
everyday) was significant because Durkheim could relate it to the distinction between
the individual and society. In this respect, the sacred symbolizes society whilst the
profane symbolizes the individual.

Durkheim's interpretation is based upon the assumption that for society to exist,
certain latent functions have to be performed. All societies, for example, need to
develop mechanisms that foster social solidarity. Whether these functions are carried-
out by organized religions or by other cultural institutions appears to be of little
consequence. In modern societies the mechanisms that exist to promote social
integration and social solidarity simply take a different form.

Parsons‟ views on the nature of religious belief and practice start from the idea that
all societies require a central value system if they are to exist and develop as a society.
That is, a society-wide system of common values and norms to which everyone in
society can be encouraged to subscribe.

As the brain needs oxygen to function; a biological mechanism for pumping oxygen to
the brain is needed, the heart is the mechanism that serves this purpose. In social terms
societies need a central value system; a social mechanism for pumping values around
the social system is needed Religion - a common feature of all societies - performs
this function.

According to him religions are a social mechanism for originating and propagating
common values for a number of reasons: They involve a belief in a power that is

87
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

higher than individual people (that is, a higher authority). This higher authority can be
used to represent and develop common moral codes. Common values can be
reinforced and given meaning to people through the organization of collective
practices and ceremonies. By making people meet to practice their common beliefs,
social integration and solidarity is created.

Parsons saw the decline of exclusive forms of religion as a cultural institution as more
or less inevitable in modern societies, once a scientific belief system started to develop
and become widely accepted. However, since he employed the widest possible
definition of ―religion‖ it is not true to say that he saw modern societies as secular.

As scientific knowledge develops, the content of religious ceremonies loses some of

its significance, but the structural imperative remains - therefore, new forms of
collective ceremony arise to fulfil this social imperative. Religious ceremony - based
upon hundreds of years of collective observation persists (as a form of tradition) - but
is gradually replaced in the collective consciousness by other forms of collective
ceremony.

Criticisms
1. Anthropologists have criticized Durkheim for his incomplete knowledge of
religious practice and his reliance on secondary sources (for example he did not
observe personally the religious practices about which he wrote).
2. By stressing the integrating aspects of religion (religious practice as the basis for
social solidarity, conformity to group values, etc.), Durkheim has neglected to look at
religion as a source of conflict and social change.
3. They neglects the ideological content of religion; that is, it may represent not just
a means of social control, but one that serves the interests of the powerful.

Functions and Dysfunctions of Religion

Functions of Religion
The universality of religion is not based upon the forms of belief and practice, but
upon the social functions which religion universally fulfills. These functions are of
great individual as well as social significance.
1. Religion Provides Religious Experience: This is the basic function of religion.
Prayer, worship and meditation are the summary of religious experience. . It facilitates
the development of personality, sociability and creativeness.
2. Religion Provides Peace of Mind: Religion provides for the individual the most
desired peace of mind. At every crisis, personal or collective, religion is called in for
consolation and peace of mind. It promotes goodness and helps the development of
character.
3. Religion Promotes Social Solidarity: Unity and Identity. Religion upholds and

88
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

validates the traditional ways of the life. More than that it unites people. It is known
that a common faith, common value-judgements, common sentiments, common
worship are significant factors in unifying people.
4. Religion Conserves the Value of Life: Thomas F.0 'Dea says, religion sacralizes
the norms and values of established society. It maintains the dominance of group goals
over individual impulses.
5. Religion is an Agent of Social Control: Religion is one of the forms of informal
means of social control. It regulates the activities of people in its own way. It
prescribes rules of conduct for people to follow.
6. Religion Promotes Welfare: Religion renders service to the people and promotes
their welfare. It appeals to the people to be sympathetic, merciful and co-operative. It
rouses in them the spirit of mutual help and co-operation.
7. Religion Provides Recreation:. Religion promotes recreation through religious
lectures, Kirtanas, dramas, dance, music. Various religious festivals and rituals can
provide relief to the disturbed mind.
8. Religion Explains Individual Suffering and Helps to Integrate Personality:
Religion tries to give release from the very thing it instills, guilt. Ritual means are
freely provided for wiping away guilt, so that one can count on divine grace.

Dysfunctions of Religion
Religion, on the contrary, has its own dysfunctional aspect also. It does certain
disservices also. Karl Marx, Thomas F. O'dea and others have pin pointed the negative
side of the functions or the dysfunctions of religion also.
1. Religion inhibits protests and impedes social changes: Religion provides man
emotional consolation and helps him to reconcile himself with situations. In doing so,
T.F.O' Dea remarks, religion inhibits protests and impedes social changes which may
even prove to be beneficial to the welfare of the society.
2. Hampers the adaptation of society to changed condition: A religion can make
norms of behavior and can also sacralize the norms and values of society. Some of the
norms which lose their appropriateness under changed conditions may also be
imposed by religion. This can impede a more functionally appropriate adaptation of
society to changing conditions.
3. Religion increases conflict and makes the evolution of realistic solutions more
difficult. Because of religious convictions, the left-wing Protestant sects of the
Reformation period became the victims of intolerance.
4. Impedes the development of new identities. Religion builds deeply into the personality
structures of people a strong animosity that makes them to oppose their opponents tooth and nail.
5. Religion often makes its followers to become dependents on religious institutions
and leaders instead of developing in them an ability to assume individual
responsibility and -self-direction.
6. Religion in its course of development, has at times, supported evil practices such
as-cannibalism, suicide, slavery, incest, killing of the aged, untouchability, human and
animal sacrifice, etc.

89
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

7. Marx said, religion has often been used as an instrument of exploiting the poor
and the depressed class. Hence Marx calls religion as the opium of the masses.
8. Religion by placing high premium on divine power and divine grace has made
people to become fatalistic.
9. Science is often regarded as a challenge to religion. Religion has time and again
tried to prevent the attempts of scientist from revealing newly discovered facts.
10. Religion has often made people to become blind, dumb and deaf to the reality. It
has often made people to become bigots and fanatics.

Weberian view of Religion

Unlike Marx, who characterized religion as offering false hope to the disenfranchised
or Durkheim who viewed religion as a necessary cohesion in society, Max Weber
focused his work on the interaction of culture and religion in relation to the economic
system of a society. He, as were Marx and Durkheim, was perplexed with the rise of
capitalism, which originated out of Britain, and the change in society in response to it.
He studied and wrote much on the history of economics in his early years.

Whereas Marx felt that religion was an obstacle to social change, Weber held that it
was an agent of social change. He was not a strict positivist, as Durkheim was so he
was not as concerned with direct causal links as he was with cultural influence on the
individual‘s rational choice. He felt that religion often shaped a person‘s image of the
world and focused his study on historical factors which led to social action
surrounding religion and economics. Although Marx and Durkheim did address the
issue of religion in society, Weber took the study much deeper creating his own
discipline.

Weber‘s first and most known work on religion was his The Protestant Ethic and the
Spirit of Capitalism (1904-5). In it he argued that capitalism was the social
counterpart of Calvinistic theology. He then moved onto other areas of the world with
The Religion of China: Confucianism and Taoism, The Religion of India: The
Sociology of Hinduism and Buddhism, and Ancient Judaism. His goal was to find
reason for different political and economic developmental paths in geographic areas
within the religions of the societies. Main themes of study were based on the form of
economy which developed in the specific area, the social stratification of the area, and
finding distinguishing characteristics unique to Western civilization.

Weber began his work by observing in countries with both Protestant and Catholic
populations, that the more financially successful people, leaders, business owners,
highly skilled workers etc., were overwhelmingly Protestant. With this observation he
formed his thesis that Calvinist ethic and ideas influenced the development of
capitalism. This theory is sometimes viewed as a reversal of Marx's thesis that the
economic base of society determines all other aspects of it. He defines the spirit of
capitalism as the ideas and habits that favor the rational pursuit of economic gain.
Weber held that certain types of Protestantism, specifically Calvinism, favored the

90
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

rational pursuit of economic gain and worldly activities which was given positive
spiritual and moral meaning in the religion. This meaning was taken indirectly from
the doctrine of predestination which stated that God decided before a person was born
whether that person would end up in heaven or hell and no matter what good works
that person performed, they could not alter that predetermination. This created anxiety
in the individual which Calvinists resolved by regarding worldly achievement as a
sign of God‘s favor.

Unlike Catholics who were promised a route to salvation and a place in heaven
through sacramental participation and condemnation of the pursuit of profits
especially through commerce, trade, and lending, Calvinist‘s considered investing,
and profit making a moral duty. Calvinism gave capitalism moral sanction creating
many dedicated entrepreneurs, which he called heroic entrepreneurs. In his conclusion
Weber describes the spirit of capitalism and the rationalization of scientific pursuit in
modern times as an iron cage in which the technical and economic conditions of
machine production determine the lives of the individual. For Weber, a society in
which human activities and relations are governed by rational calculation and
economic compulsions was devoid of meaning.

In classifying religious values, Weber distinguished between this-worldliness and

otherworldliness. He argued that religious values tended toward one orientation or the
other. For instance, Christian and Hindu beliefs tend to fulfill worldly tasks in order to
gain other worldly goals. Calvinistic views, although originally concerned primarily
with heaven and hell reversed their orientation, resembling historical Judaism, which
recognizes this world as the primary center within which religious values are affirmed.

Weber distinguishes between ascetic and non-ascetic values. Asceticism includes

denial of the flesh, all primal pleasure impulses. This offers the believer renunciation
and purification, the attainment of everlasting salvation. This is often found in
Buddhism and Christian monastic life. Rationality was another concept which Weber
found in religious values. For instance, nirvana to the Hindu is attained by achieving
unity with the supernatural. Ethics is also an important concept in religion with many
Western traditional values linked to Judeo-Christian ethics. Mysticism and magic
were also found among many of the religions which Weber studied. He concluded that
religious systems bearing the same name, over time, may shift among the various
concepts of asceticism to mysticism to ethical, etc., depending on the changes in
society.

Current Trends in Religion

The New Age subculture is a broad movement of late 20th century in Europe and
America characterized by an eclectic and individual approach to self-spiritual
exploration. With continued themes from the 1960‘s counterculture movement, the
movement quickly spread through occult communities through the 70‘s and 80‘s.
Rather than following an organized religion, those who are affiliated typically

91
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

construct their own spiritual journey based on individual beliefs and needs. Material is
taken as needed from various world religions and mystical traditions. The movement's
strongest supporters are followers of esotericism, a religious perspective based on the
acquisition of mystical knowledge seeking personal transformation and self-healing.
Other popular concepts used are Eastern meditative thought practices, shamanism,
use of mediums, astrology, alchemy, magic, and occultism. It is considered an
alternative search for spirituality using an integration of mind, body, and spirit with
many ideas rejecting mainstream. Divine guidance is a more appropriate guide for
New Age thinking, rather than rationalism, scientific skepticism, or the scientific
method. The movement still remains steady although its height was during the late
80‘s and early 90‘s. The increased following of this type of practice as a religion
clearly shows the changes in society‘s conceptualization and regulation of what counts
as religion in today‘s world. In Social Theory and Religion, James Beckford, a
social constructionist, asserts that ―whatever else religion is, it is a social phenomenon
regardless of whether religious beliefs and experiences actually relate to supernatural
realities…. religion is expressed by means of human ideas, symbols, feelings,
practices and organizations and these expressions are all products of social interaction,
structures, and processes‖.

Types of religious practices

Animism
According to the animistic theory, the idea of the human soul was first suggested by
the contrast between the mental representations experienced while asleep (dreams)
and those of normal experience. The primitive man grants equal status to both, and is
thus led to postulate a "second self" within himself, one resembling the first, but made
of an ethereal matter and capable of traveling great distances in short periods of time.
The transformation of this soul into a spirit is achieved with death, which, to the
primitive mind, is not unlike a prolonged sleep; and with the destruction of the body
comes the idea of spirits detached from any organism and wandering about freely in
space. Henceforth, spirits are assumed to involve themselves, for good or ill, in the
affairs of men, and all human events varying slightly from the ordinary are attributed
to their influence. As their power grows, men increasingly consider it wise to
conciliate their favor or appease them when they are irritated, whence come prayers,
offerings, sacrifices -- in short, the entire apparatus of religious worship. Reasoning
wholly by analogy, the primitive mind also attributes "second selves" to all non-
human objects -- plants, animals, rivers, trees, stars, etc. -- which thus account for the
phenomena of the physical world; and in this way, the ancestor cult gives rise to the
cult of nature.

The major religions of the world (Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, Confucianism,

Christianity, Taoism, and Judaism) differ in many respects, including how each
religion is organized and the belief system each upholds. Other differences include the
nature of belief in a higher power, the history of how the world and the religion began,
and the use of sacred texts and objects.

92
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Monism and Pluralism

Monism is the doctrine that the answer to one or other of these questions is "Only
one." Opposed to monism is the doctrine of pluralism, which is that there are many
kinds of thing, or that there are many things. It will be apparent, on reflection, that this
weaker form of pluralism, that there are many things, is quite consistent with the
weaker form of monism, that there is only one kind of thing to which the many
particular things belong. For instance, materialism, in the sense that everything
existent is material, is a form of monism because it insists that all existent things are
of a single kind, the material kind. Thus, monism and pluralism, though opposed, do
not always exclude each other.

Monism is a belief in single attribute, God or religious idea. It is centered on the belief
of oneness of all existences or in a single god, ideology. The term was popular in all
cultures, including Hinduism as Advaita, in western literature, it was coined by
Christian Wolff, but was used in a narrow sense. Philosophers like Thales, Plotinus
and Adi Shankara preached monism in one form or the other.

Among modern religions, Islam is a monistic religion as its believers deny existence
of any other power than Allah. Similarly, Advait philosophy of Hinduism also
contends that there is no distinction between the disciple and God and they are one
and there is ultimately a single being. Sufi saints also stressed upon this concept of a
single all-powerful entity. Some also believe that the monistic beliefs are symbol of a
nascent religion. As different cults and sects emerge from original religion, it
transforms into a pluralistic religion. E B Tylor, on the other hand, gave an
evolutionary theory of religion, in which, he contended that monotheistic religions are
hallmark of modern societies and pluralistic religions are hallmark of primitive
societies.

Pluralist Religious Practices

According to Steve Bruce- Religious pluralism results from a variety of sources and it
has undermined the communal basis of religious orthodoxy as well. Modernization
and industrialization are two key factors which are said to be causes of growth of
social fragmentation and diverse cultural and religious groups come into contact of
each other in such a society. In a diverse society, state also cannot support any single
religion without causing conflict. Plurality of religions is also, in a way, functional to
the society as well. It reminds individuals that religion is a matter of choice, and
hence, a private matter.
Bryan Wilson argues that with pluralization of society, religious values become
personal values and no longer remain community values. Peter Berger has linked the
growth of the pluralistic beliefs to the growing trend of modernization and
secularization as pluralistic beliefs undermine the one absolute truth.

Totemism
Durkheim used the religion of various groups of Australian Aborigines to develop his

93
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

argument. He saw their religion, which he called totemism, as the simplest and most
basic form of religion.
Each clan has a totem, usually an animal or a plant. This totem is then represented by
drawings made on wood or stone. These drawings are called churingas. Usually,
churingas are at least as sacred as the species which they represent and sometimes
more so. The totem is a symbol. It is the emblem of the clan. It is its flag; it is the sign
by which each clan distinguishes itself from all others. However, the totem is more
than the churinga which represents it-it is the most sacred object in Aborigine ritual.
The totem is ‘the outward and visible form of the totemic principle or god‘.

Durkheim argued that if the totem is at once the symbol of God and of the society, is
that not because the god and the society are only one. Thus, he suggested, in
worshipping god, people are in fact worshipping society. Society is the real object of
religious veneration.

Church – Sect Continuum

Religions organize themselves—their institutions, practitioners, and structures—in a
variety of fashions. For instance, when the Roman Catholic Church emerged, it
borrowed many of its organizational principles from the ancient Roman military and
turned senators into cardinals, for example. Sociologists use different terms, like
ecclesia, denomination, and sect, to define these types of organizations. Scholars are
also aware that these definitions are not static. Most religions transition through
different organizational phases. For example, Christianity began as a cult, transformed
into a sect, and today exists as an ecclesia.

Cult
Steve Bruce (1995) defines a cult as a ‗loosely knit group organized around some
common themes and interests but lacking any sharply defined and exclusive belief
system‘. The cultic act is social congregational act in which the group reenacts its
relationship to the sacred objects and, through them, to the beyond, and in doing so it
reinforces its own solidarity and reaffirms its own values, in it, a relationship of
fellowship, and of leader and followers, are acted out, reasserted and strengthened.

For the individual, it incorporates him into the group which provides him with the
emotional support, and by its re-enactment of the religious experience relates him to
the source of strength and comfort

Cults seem to flourish in metropolitan centers where culturally heterogeneous

populations are thrown together and they widely feel the impact of most rapid and
impinging social change. It creates situations of contingency and powerlessness and,
thus, the problems of adjustment. The cults help to meet that situation.

Cults, like sects, are new religious groups. In the United States today this term often

94
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

carries pejorative connotations. However, almost all religions began as cults and
gradually progressed to levels of greater size and organization. The term cult is
sometimes used interchangeably with the term new religious movement (NRM). In
its pejorative use, these groups are often disparaged as being secretive, highly
controlling of members‘ lives, and dominated by a single, charismatic leader.

Controversy exists over whether some groups are cults, perhaps due in part to media
sensationalism over groups like polygamous Mormons or the Peoples Temple
followers who died at Jonestown, Guyana. Some groups that are controversially
labeled as cults today include the Church of Scientology and the Hare Krishna
movement.

Sect
A sect is a small and relatively new group. Most of the well-known Christian
denominations in the United States today began as sects. For example, the Methodists
and Baptists protested against their parent Anglican Church in England, just as Henry
VIII protested against the Catholic Church by forming the Anglican Church. From
―protest‖ comes the term Protestant.

The sect is often intolerant toward other religious groups. It may or may not
proselytize. Obliteration of distinction between the clergy and the laity is its chief
characteristic. In its organization, the Sect is usually democratic. It may be this
worldly as well as other wordly.

Occasionally, a sect is a breakaway group that may be in tension with larger society.
They sometimes claim to be returning to ―the fundamentals‖ or to contest the veracity
of a particular doctrine. When membership in a sect increases over time, it may grow
into a denomination. Often a sect begins as an offshoot of a denomination, when a
group of members believes they should separate from the larger group.

The Sect takes birth in protest and rebellion. Its relation with the political authority
may or may not be smooth. If rebellious, the Sect may be prosecuted
Some sects dissolve without growing into denominations. Sociologists call these
established sects. Established sects, such as the Amish or Jehovah‘s Witnesses fall
halfway between sect and denomination on the ecclesia–cult continuum because they
have a mixture of sect-like and denomination-like characteristics.

Denomination
The Denomination grows out of the Sect as the latter grows out of the Ecclesia. The
line between ecclesia and denomination is not always clear-cut nor is the line between
sect and cult. .denomination is what usually results when a sect becomes 'respectable'
in the eyes of middle-class society and relaxes its religious vigor. It is also observed
that a conservative type of sect is more prone to change into a denomination.

95
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

A denomination is a large, mainstream religious organization, but it does not claim to

be official or state sponsored. It is one religion among many. For example, Baptist,
African Methodist Episcopal, Catholic, and Seventh-day Adventist are all Christian
denominations.

Ecclesia, The Church

The term ecclesia, originally referring to a political assembly of citizens in ancient
Athens, Greece, now refers to a congregation. In sociology, the term is used to refer to
a religious group that most all members of a society belong to. It is considered a
nationally recognized, or official, religion that holds a religious monopoly and is
closely allied with state and secular powers. The United States does not have an
ecclesia by this standard; in fact, this is the type of religious organization that many of
the first colonists came to America to escape.

Having the organizational distinction of the laity and clergy, the Ecclesia is an
apostolical order. The clergy consists of the ministers of Christian religion. They are
trained, selected and appointed. They are knitted into a hierarchy of allotted offices,
their functioning is bureaucratized. Clergy-hood is a career. A member of the clergy
derives his religious qualities from the office which he holds by virtue of appointment
and ordination. It is quite obvious that the entire situation is hierarchical and
bureaucratic in its functioning.

Difference between Cults and Sects

Criteria Sect Cult
Membership size Small Medium
Membership base Working class, Ethnic Middle classes
minorities
Commitment levels Highest commitment, very Low commitment, very
exclusive membership inclusive membership
Monopoly of truth Yes No

96
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Organizational form Hierarchical, organized around Loose knit networks,

charismatic leader client-customer relations
Relation to state Sometimes in conflict Generally apolitical
Relation to Rejects mainstream values Accepts mainstream
mainstream society values
Examples Jim Jones‘ the People‘s The Church of Christ
Temple

Religion in Modern Society

Religion and Science

Albert Einstein believed that science without religion was lame, and religion without
science was blind. But the debate over whether science and religion can co-exist has
been going on since the dawn of mankind and continues to divide opinion.

1. Science limits itself to the empirical, religion concerns itself with the
supernatural.
2. Science concerns the processes that account for the natural world: how planets
move, the composition of matter and the atmosphere, the origin and adaptations of
organisms. Religion concerns the meaning and purpose of the world and of human
life, the proper relation of people to the Creator and to each other, the moral values
that inspire and govern people‘s lives.
3. Science is based observation and reasoning from experimentation. Religion
assumes that human beings can access a deeper level of information that is not
available by either observation or reason. The scientific method is proven by its
success. The religious method is refuted by its failure.
4. From religion comes a man‘s purpose; from science, his power to achieve it.
5. Religion and science both offer explanations for why life and the universe exist.
Science relies on testable empirical evidence and observation. Religion relies on
subjective belief in a creator.
6. Religion is based on authority, and science, which is based on observation and
reason.

Subjective, personal feelings should be kept out the scientific process. Scientific
knowledge should not be influenced by the personal opinions or biases of the
researchers who conduct the experiments which provide the data to generate scientific
knowledge.

In contrast, knowledge in many religious traditions is a matter of personal faith and

intimate spiritual experience. Many religious experiences, prayer, for example, are
highly personal, and not meant to be replicated by others. Any knowledge claims

97
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

made by religions which are not verifiable by empirical observations cannot be

regarded as ‗scientific‘.

Ian Barbour in his book ‗When Science meets Religion‘, suggests the relationship
between religion and science can be analyzed in four ways:

1. Incompatibility: According to Avelina Espinosa, the historical conflict between

evolution and religion is intrinsic to the incompatibility
between scientific rationalism/empiricism and the belief in supernatural causation.

Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins is openly hostile to religion because he

believes it actively debauches the scientific enterprise and education involving
science. According to Dawkins, religion subverts science and saps the intellect.
Chemist Peter Atkins states that "whereas religion scorns the power of human
comprehension, science respects it." The conflict thesis holds that religion and science
have been in conflict continuously throughout history.

2. Independence: Stephen Jay Gould suggests religion and science are two "non-
overlapping magisteria"- they deal with fundamentally separate aspects of human
experience and so, they co-exist peacefully. In science, explanations must be based on
evidence. Religious faith, in contrast, does not depend on empirical evidence and
typically involves supernatural forces or entities. Because they are not a part of nature,
supernatural entities cannot be investigated by science. In this sense, science and
religion are separate and address aspects of human understanding in different ways.

3. Dialogue: Institutions interested in the intersection between science and religion

include the Ian Ramsey Centre and the Faraday Institute. Eugenie Scott suggests that
the "science and religion" movement is composed mainly of theists who have a
healthy respect for science. It includes interested and involved scientists, priests,
clergymen and theologians.

4. Integration: Scientific and theological perspectives often coexist peacefully.

Several religions have historically integrated well with scientific ideas. For instance,
the ancient Egyptian technological mastery applied to monotheistic ends, the
flourishing of logic and mathematics under Hinduism and Buddhism, and scientific
advances made by Muslim scholars during the Ottoman empire. Even many 19th-

98
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

century Christian communities welcomed scientists. Religions have also given key
participation in development of modern universities and libraries; centers of learning
& scholarship.
Secularization
Secularization is a term used by sociologists to refer to a process by which the
overarching and transcendent religious system of old is reduced in modern
functionally differentiated societies to a subsystem alongside other subsystems, losing
in this process its overarching claims over these other subsystems. This is the original
meaning, but this process has consequences for the organizational and individual
levels, which suggests that secularization needs to be analyzed on the societal (macro),
the organizational (meso), and the individual (micro) levels.
Secularization can be seen as several types of concepts:
1. The decline of religion from an objective standpoint, such as, institutions,
membership or participation in worship.
2. Institutions, practices and activities traditionally done by religion being assumed by
non-religious social processes, such as, education being done by the state.
3. Norms from religion being transposed to the world, for example, the
institutionalization of the norm of equality.
4. Desacralization, i.e., approaching the world through rational explanation and
manipulation rather than through awe and a sense of mystery.
5. Religion conforming to the world.

Evidence for secularization: statistics on religious behavior

According to the Church of England’s data; both church attendance and attendance at
‗hatching, matching and dispatching‘ (baptism/ marriage/ funeral) ceremonies are
falling.
The 2016 figures show:
 Usual Sunday attendance at Church of England churches in 2016 was 740,000
people (86% adults, 14% children under 16).
 There were 120,000 Church of England baptisms and services of thanksgiving
for the gift of a child – representing 10% of live births.
 There were 45,000 Church of England marriages and services of prayer and
dedication after civil marriages – just 20% of marriages.
 There were 139,000 Church of England-led funerals during 2016, 57% of
which took place in churches and 43% at crematoria/cemeteries – 28% of
funerals. The higher percentage probably reflects the greater proclivity for
people near death to ‗find‘ ‗comfort‘ in ‗religion‘.
 The church of England notes that most of its headline indicators show a decline
of 10-15% over the last decade, since 2006.

Some contemporary sociologists rejected the secularization thesis of dichotomy

between traditional and modernity. As Luckmann argued that-religion is still alive,
though it has receded from the public sphere. The growth of fundamentalism,

99
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

revivalism, theological states like- Islamic states etc. compliment his words.

Empty Churches are a common sight across Europe

This indicates that modernity does not necessarily lead to total secularization, it is
possible when religion is not regarded as the only panacea to all human questions and
problems.

Fundamentalism
Religious fundamentalism is an extremely conservative view which understands
religious thought and practice through literal interpretation of sacred texts such as the
Bible or the Quran. This concept became more popular during the 20th century in
reaction to modernism and fear of secularization in society. It is most often found in
Islamic and Protestant Christian groups which stress the infallibility of the sacred texts
in matters of faith, morals, and as historical record.

Gabriel Almond, R. Scott Appleby and Emmanuel Sivan identify fundamentalist

movements among Jews in Israel, Muslims in Pakistan, Palestine, Egypt, and the
Russian regions of Dagestan and Chechnya, Sikhs and Hindus in India, Christians in
the USA and Ireland, and Buddhists in Sri Lanka.

Almond defined it as ‗a discernible pattern of religious militancy by which self-

styled" true believers attempt to arrest the erosion of religious identity, fortify the
borders of the religious community, and create viable alternatives to secular
institutions and behaviors'.

According to Giddens, fundamentalists are traditionalists who seek to return to the

fundamentals of their faith.

100
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Characteristics of fundamentalism
 Religious texts are seen as perfect. As such, they might be read literally – be
it the Bible, the Qur‘an or the Torah. One consequence of this is that
fundamentalism rejects religious pluralism.
 There is a profound rejection of modern society. Modern society is seen as
morally corrupt. Living in the modern world is seen as problematic because of
the variety of choice. Fundamentalists reject the idea of choice and assert the
value of tradition.
 Activism is strongly encouraged. Fundamentalists are vocal in their struggle
of good against evil e.g., media images often focus on fundamentalists
protesting against modernity.
 Fundamentalism reinforces nationalism. Fundamentalists often appeal to
deep-seated fears of ‗strangers‘ e.g.,Narender Modi is the Chief Minister of
Gujarat State – Human rights groups have blamed the massacre of over 1000
Muslims in 2002 on his inflammatory speeches.
 Fundamentalists have a political agenda. Absolute opposition to homosexuals,
abortion and birth control.

Factors for emergence of Fundamentalism

 Where there is ‗ideological cohesion‟ – around a single God and/ or sacred text
for example. Fundamentalism seems to be stronger in Christianity and Islam,
not so strong in Hinduism and Buddhism.
 When there is a common enemy to unite against – Bruce notes that Islamic
Fundamentalism is often united against the USA.
 Lack of centralized control, it might be that Catholicism has not developed
fundamentalist strains because the Pope and the Vatican tightly control
dissenters. However, in Protestant Christianity and Islam, there is more
freedom for individuals on the fringes to claim to have found a ‗more
authentic‘ and fundamentalist interpretation of those religions.
 The existence of marginalized individuals facing oppression –
Fundamentalism needs recruits, and if a Fundamentalist group emerges with
claims that it can provide a better life for people if they just adhere to the faith,
it is more likely to grow
 Bruce further argues that the nature of Fundamentalism is shaped by how the
political institutions deal with Fundamentalist movements: where they are
blocked access to political representation, movements are more likely to turn
to violence

Islamophobia
Islamophobia is an exaggerated fear, hatred, and hostility toward Islam and
Muslims that is perpetuated by negative stereotypes resulting in bias, discrimination,
and the marginalization and exclusion of Muslims from social, political, and civic
life.

101
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Rising anti-Islamic rhetoric, hate crimes, violations of rights of Muslims, and blaming
them for the spread of the pandemic and now the police action against students and
activists who had participated in the peaceful demonstrations against the
controversial citizenship law has raised serious questions on the democratic
credentials of the country.
Religion and culture outpace politics across all regions as the root cause of tension
between Muslim and Western worlds. This is significant considering political interests
can vary and change while cultural and religious differences are more ingrained within
populations.

Prejudice plays a key role in the existence and proliferation of Islamophobia, in U.S.,
about one-half of nationally representative samples of Mormons, Protestants,
Catholics, Muslims, and Jews agree that in general, most Americans are prejudiced
toward Muslim Americans. Seeing Muslims as not loyal, voicing prejudice against
Muslims, and avoiding Muslims as neighbors are all symptoms of Islamophobia.

Religious Revivalism
Revivalism is a movement whose aim is to make a religion more popular and more
influential. Simply put, revivalism means revival of religion in any form, be it
institutional attendance as in a church, growth of religious institutions and
phenomenon like sects, cults and denominations, rise in individuals pursuing spiritual
peace through personal motions of religion and finally, growth of fundamental ideas
or fundamentalism.
These are referred to mass movements which are based upon intense religious
excitement. Periodic religious revivals, which seek to restore commitment and
attachment to the group, are a regular sociological feature of religious traditions.

Revivalism simply means revival of religion in any form, be it institutional attendance

as in a church, growth of religious institutions and phenomenon like sects, cults and
denominations, rise in individuals pursuing spiritual peace through personal motions
of religion and finally, growth of fundamental ideas or fundamentalism. As traditional
religions lose their hold, religion is not disappearing, but is being channeled in new
directions. Not all scholars agree, however. Proponents of the idea of secularization
point out that these movements remain peripheral to society as a whole even if they
make a profound impact on the lives of their individual followers.

In India Arya Samaj is one of the most important revivalist movements which were
based on shudhi movement. It aimed at converting Hindus back to the fold who had
converted to other religions. This had profound impact on Hindu especially lower
caste Hindus. They sought to other religions to improve their social status. They also
gave equality to women especially in education. In contemporary context the rise of
religious consciousness or the growth of religious revivalism is offering a major
challenge to the pluralistic secular & egalitarian character of the civil society.

102
www.iasgurukul.com
SOCIOLOGY BY PRANAY AGGARWAL IAS GURUKUL Call 99996 93744

Religion and Social Change

Max Weber‟s ‗Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism‘ is one of the best
accounts of how religion can bring about social change.

Weber pointed out that Capitalism developed first in England and Holland, taking off
in the early 17th century. Protestantism was the main religion in these two countries,
unlike most other countries in Europe at that time which were Catholic. Max Weber
argued that the social norms instilled by Protestantism laid the foundations for modern
capitalism.

Neo-Marxist Otto Maduro pointed to the example of Liberation Theology in Latin

America to demonstrate that religion can act as a force for social change. He further
suggested that this is especially the case where the marginalized have no other outlet
for their grievances than religious institutions.

The Arab Spring which swept across the Middle East and North Africa between
2010-2014 offers a more contemporary example of the role of religion in social
change. Islamic groups were very active in using social media to highlight the political
injustices in countries such as Tunisia and Egypt.

However, Functionalists and Traditional Marxists have generally argued that religion
prevents social change.

103
www.iasgurukul.com