IIi Match the following key terms with their definitions

1. Aggregated socio-economic status	a) a form of stratification when social ranks in a society are hierarchically structured with respect to authority and power
2. Economic stratification	b) people’s moving or transmition from one social position to another in the social space
3. Horizontal social mobility	c) a person’s position and place in the society, a generalized parameter of stratification
4. Income	d) amount of money a person or family makes for a definite period of time (month or year)
5. Lumpens	e) differentiation of the population into hierarchically overlapped classes or strata (by P.A.Sorikin.)
6. Occupational stratification	f) accumulated income in the form of cash or materialized money, it can be movable property and real estate
7. Political stratification	g) transmitions of people from one social stratum to one higher or lower in the social scale
8. Prestige	h) movements from one social position to another situated on the same level
9. Social inequality	i) a form of stratification when the focus is on the wealthy and the poor
10. Social mobility	j) people who are completely discarded by the society
11. Social stratification	k) respect that public opinion gives to a certain job, profession, or occupation
12. Status incompatibility	l) a contradiction between statuses or between status characteristics in the person’s status set
13. Stratification profile	m) a form of stratification if members of the society are differentiated into various occupational groups and some of these occupations are deemed more honorable than others, or if occupations are internally divided between those who give orders and those who receive orders
14. Vertical social mobility	n) structural distribution of wealth and income that shows a ratio of the upper, middle and lower classes in the country’s population, or the level of social inequality in the given society
15. Wealth	o) unequal distribution of material wealth in a society

Text 4

Global stratification

By Larry M. Lounsbury

Is global stratification nothing more than an international class system? If so what is its cause?

"Historically, wealth flowed from poor societies to rich nations through colonialism,...during the twentieth century, exploitation continues through neocolonialism...economic exploitation by multinational corporations..." (Macionis,.231).India was invaded numerous times along with Africa; by people such as the Ancient Aryans, Muslims; and then the British. Each Colonial Power took natural resources to their own country, leaving part of their own culture behind. In cases such as India, the strength of the caste system and its acceptance; was shaped by dharma; giving local social fabrics the ability to retain their strength regardless of who tried to conquer them (Marcionis, 232).

Tradition and strong families often enabled families in poorer countries to survive on the edge of survival in a happy state. Although the absolute poverty of India would cause violence in western countries, India accepts it without violence. Strong families are one trait that has never left the poorer countries. Technology may change, but there remains a certain acceptance of duty and destiny that does not change in poorer countries. This causes a strong opposition to new technology, even if it can mean a better standard of living for all. The Amish in America, Islamic people of Iran are examples of these types of cultures. India's culture was able to evolve with the help of Global stratification. They still have cows for the poor farmers in India. These cows are allowed to wander freely in the modern cities, remaining part of the Indian farmers means of survival in times of drought (Marcionis, 233).

Global stratification appears to be a type of international class system. In most cases the class system remains stable for many centuries due to tradition, religion or economic structure. The new cultural patterns of the Colonial Industrial revolution were able to control poorer countries by working with the strict religious allegiance of the local societies. The British learned to manipulate the Indian Culture through their Muslim and Hindu beliefs. The local Muslim and Hindu followed the orders of the Nawab in the Nabob game. This blending was through the use of a class global stratification system. Those that followed the colonial system in local cultures were rewarded in the new system with a new system of wealth, virtue, and prestige that normally was not been available to that class or ethnic society at the time. Eventually the Colonial system and older traditional system of local class did explode into violence and revolution. In India the introduction of Education and capitalism caused the system of landowners to shift power from Mughal Zamindars to the new Hindu moneylenders of Calcutta (Wolpert, 49).

A cause of an International class system is based on social, economic and religious conditions of the global community. This class system can be very changeable as it is in the United States, or fixed as it is in the poorer countries such as Iran. Lack of education can be the cause of a very low upward mobility in certain countries such as Africa, or Latin America. During the Industrial revolution, along with the importance of individualism; Calvinism caused wealth to become a sign of personal virtue. Kinship and community still remain as a primary element of class in the poorer countries of the world. Even historical changes can affect the international class system. The Japanese saw an increase in class and wealth as their knowledge and productivity increased. Japan's buildup by the U.S. after WWII brought about Western changes in their class system. It appears to be a middle road between modernization and dependency for the Global community to improve. Oil has to have certain dependency of monopoly that controls the rate of Modernization in many countries. Food also can be placed higher in value than oil in countries such as Iraq (Marcionis, 233). Yet oil is needed for our country to run its transportation. As long as there is those who wish to have absolute power over their fellow man, then a unbalanced class system will remain.

Immanuel Wallersteins views Dependency in Global Stratification three ways. The poor countries produce relatively few crops that are exported to rich countries. Raw materials from these poor countries are purchased cheaply by rich nations, and then shipped to countries where their raw material are used in other products. The rubber of the African Congo is a prime example of this. Today the average years wage of those in the Congo equals just several days worth of work in the U.S. These poorer countries lack an industrial base. India often is mentioned as a country of the past that had its cotton shipped out of the country to Britain, only to be resold at an expensive profit back into India. Many local weavers lost their jobs because of this. Foreign debt often restricts the profits of poorer countries. This in turn causes poor countries to have unemployment and high inflation (Marcionis, 236).High unemployment means fewer local schools and universities. Class systems that do not offer upward mobility through education often lead to less freedoms. Dictatorships are only able to control the hearts and minds of the ignorant.

In the global class system, the function of shared values of certain class groups of society help knit communities together. Some societies do not want modernization. This can be a benefit to some in these poorer cultures, while a great challenge to their survival. In the present war in Iraq, fears of religious persecution from the traditional sects of Islam, because of accepting some Western Ideas can be frightening. The loss of power that Saddams henchmen felt resulted in them blowing up some of their own countrymen. Persecuted people yearn to have better jobs, and no matter if the source of education came education offered through western eyes. Often corrupt men could only retain power by keeping their fellow man impoverished (Macionis & Benokraitis ,200).

I Vocabulary