Table of contents.
Introduction ……………………………………………………………………… …… 2-4

1.1 The nature of social inequality and its consequences ... ……. ……… …… .5-11
1.2 The trend of changes in inequality …………………………………. …… ... 12-15
CHAPTER 2. THE PROBLEM OF POVERTY
2.1 Theoretical aspect of the concept of poverty ………………………… .... ........... 16-23
2.2. Quantitative Estimates, Causes and Consequences of Poverty in Russia ... ... 24-34
2.3 Ways of overcoming poverty in modern Russian society ... 34-39
Conclusion ……………………………………………………………… .............. 40-41
List of used sources and literature ……………… .............. ...... 42-43

INTRODUCTION
Social stratification is one of the central social and economic problems, and many scientific and ideological disputes have been and are being conducted around it. At the same time, differences are the main ones in property, status and power. Social researchers have asked questions: why some groups in society are richer or more powerful than others; how inequality manifests itself in modern societies; why poverty continues to exist in today's wealthy society.
Stratification - a synonym for the term "stratification" recognized in world sociology - reflects the development of social inequality and hierarchical grouping of people at social levels that differ in prestige, property and power.
The term "stratification" means a vertical cut of the social structure, which reveals the place of certain social groups in the system of social hierarchy. A stratum is a social stratum of people who have similar objective indicators on four scales of stratification. Each stratum includes only those people who have approximately the same income, education, prestige, and power. Societies are viewed as consisting of "strata" ordered in a certain hierarchy: groups with the highest statuses at the top and the lowest statuses at the bottom.
Russian scientists Zhuravleva G.P., Vidyapin V.I., Dobrynin A.I., they call poverty a situation in which needs cannot be sufficiently satisfied. Poverty is a complex social phenomenon with economic, cultural and psychological roots. Its features are also associated with the historical conditions of the development of a particular country.
In Russia, the rapid growth in the poverty rate was due to a decline in employment and the emergence of unemployment and a sharp decline in labor income at the initial stage of cardinal socio-economic reforms of the late 20th century in the context of an ineffective social protection system. The situation is aggravated by the fact that in recent years the poverty level has remained high, and for some segments of the population the problem of life support has even worsened. Poverty is especially characteristic of those employed in the public sector of the economy, in rural areas and in small towns, for large families and families with an incomplete composition.
Until the 90s. XX century. in Russia, the poor included persons with certain individual or family characteristics: old age, poor health of the individual, loss of a breadwinner, absence of a spouse (for single mothers), large families. A certain role was played by territorial differences in the standard of living: inequality in the economic development of regions, as well as cities and villages; low qualifications, although the latter was not necessarily accompanied by low incomes. Over the past decade, there has been a massive impoverishment of the population in Russia, caused by two factors: an unprecedented decline in production and the stratification of society.
Economic reforms have seriously changed the social structure of society. There was a rapid social stratification, layers of very rich and extremely poor citizens appeared. The overwhelming majority of people were deprived of the social protection of the state, and were faced with the need to adapt to life in conditions of market instability. In these conditions, the emergence of a large number of poor people turned out to be inevitable. All this determined the choice of the topic and its relevance.
The aim of this work is to study Russian poverty and inequality in the economic aspect, their characteristics and ways of overcoming. Objectives of this course work:
Explore the features and character traits poverty and stratification of society in Russia;
consider the consequences of poverty for the Russian economy;
identify possible ways out of this situation.
Social stratification has become one of the most common and most painful phenomena in modern Russia... Currently, about 40% of citizens live below the poverty line. All this determined the choice of the topic and its relevance.

CHAPTER 1. SOCIAL DISTRIBUTION
1.1 The nature of social inequality and its consequences
Social inequality has existed throughout virtually all of human history. However, the differentiation in income and consumption of the population has been and remains one of the main characteristics of modern society. Moreover, income differentiation is viewed by many economists as a factor that stimulates labor activity.
Before the revolution in Russia, it was the estate, not the class, division of the population that was official. It was subdivided into two main estates - taxable (peasants, bourgeois) and non-taxable (nobility, clergy). Within each class, there were smaller classes and layers. The state provided them with certain rights enshrined in legislation. The rights themselves were guaranteed to the estates only insofar as they performed certain duties in favor of the state (they grew bread, were engaged in crafts, served, paid taxes). Officials regulated relations between estates, and this was the benefit of officialdom. Naturally, the estate system was inseparable from the state one. That is why we can define estates as social and legal groups that differ in the scope of rights and obligations in relation to the state.
According to the 1897 census, the entire population of the country, which is 125 million Russians, was divided into the following estates: nobles - 1.5% of the total population, clergy - 0.5%, merchants - 0.3%, bourgeois - 10, 6%, peasants - 77.1%, Cossacks - 2.3%. The first privileged class in Russia was considered the nobility, the second - the clergy. The rest of the estates were not privileged. The nobles were hereditary and personal. Not all of them were landowners, many were in the civil service, which was the main source of livelihood. But those nobles who were landowners constituted a special group - the class of landowners (among the hereditary nobles there were no more than 30% of landowners).
Many modern scientists see the origins of social inequality in the natural differences of people in physical data, personal qualities, internal energy, as well as in the strength of motivation aimed at meeting the most significant, urgent needs. Initially emerging inequality is usually extremely unstable and does not lead to the consolidation of social status. One of the sources of social tension in any country is the difference in the levels of well-being of citizens, the level of their wealth.
Wealth is determined by two factors:
1) the amount of property of all types owned by individual citizens;
2) the size of the current income of citizens.
People receive income as a result of the fact that they create their own business (become entrepreneurs) or provide the factors of production (their labor, capital or land) in their ownership for the use of other people or firms, and they use this property to produce the necessary goods. In such a mechanism for generating incomes, the possibility of their inequality was initially incorporated.
The reason for this:
1) different values ​​of the factors of production belonging to people (capital in the form of a computer, in principle, is able to bring more income than in the form of a shovel);
2) different success in the use of factors of production (for example, an employee in a firm producing scarce goods can earn higher wages than his colleague of the same qualifications working in a firm whose goods are sold with difficulty);
3) different volume of factors of production belonging to people (the owner of two oil wells receives, all other things being equal, more income than the owner of one well).
Various indicators are used to quantify income differentiation. The degree of income inequality is reflected by the Lorentz curve (Fig. 1), when plotted on the abscissa the shares of families (in% of their total number) with the corresponding percentage of income are plotted, and the shares of incomes of the considered families (in% of the total income) are plotted along the ordinate. ... The theoretical possibility of absolutely equal distribution of income is represented by the bisector, which indicates that any given percentage of families receive a corresponding percentage of income. This means that if 20, 40, 60% of families receive, respectively, 20.40.60% of the total income, then the corresponding points will be located on the bisector.

Figure 1. Lorentz curve

The Lorenz curve shows the actual distribution of income. For example, 20% of the population with the lowest income received 5% of the total income, 40% with the lowest income - 15%, etc. The shaded area between the line of absolute equality and the Lorenz curve indicates the degree of income inequality: the larger the area, the greater the degree of income inequality. If the actual distribution of income were absolutely equal, then the Lorentz curve and the bisector would coincide. The Lorenz curve is used to compare the distribution of income over different periods of time or between different population groups.
In 1918, the first Soviet studies of the working budget and everyday life were carried out, as well as the first attempts to calculate the cost of living. The subsistence minimum was calculated as a physiological one and the main item of expenditure in it was the cost of food. At the beginning of the 1930s, the calculation of the subsistence minimum was discontinued for ideological reasons and resumed only in the 1960s.
Until 1990, the socio-economic sciences, for ideological reasons, avoided using the term “poverty” and instead used the term “poor”. The severity of social tension in Russian society is not alleviated by material subsidies to the poor or periodic wage increases for low-paid public sector employees. For the majority of society, the very model of social inequality that has become established in modern Russia is unacceptable. The negative effects of rising social inequality continue to be replicated in the political arena. Large sections of the population are excluded from the political process and find themselves in a state of “political poverty”. And not only the unemployed, homeless people or low-skilled workers, but also many representatives of the intellectual strata - teachers, doctors, university professors, scientists. They are not only preoccupied with worries about survival, but also discouraged by the authorities' inattention to their urgent needs. The consciousness and behavior of the masses of people are dominated by passive adaptation to the existing order, social pessimism and apathy, distrust of the ruling bureaucracy, focus on their own problems, dull hostility and intolerance towards the powerful worlds. All this determines their attitude towards the state and society, a low level of civic engagement.
According to polls conducted at the end of 2004, in the previous three years, only 1.2% of citizens took part in political rallies, demonstrations or protests, and only 0.5% in strikes. Discontent, sometimes bordering on indignation, accumulates under the shell of civil passivity, only from time to time it breaks through to the surface, as it was in connection with the monetization of social benefits. In such an environment, the power structures and the parties that support them seek to seize the initiative and bring protest sentiments under their control within the framework of "managed democracy." Increasingly, rallies, demonstrations, marches, pickets and other mass actions are carried out by "obedient" trade unions, youth and other organizations. The electoral activity of the population is decreasing, especially in the elections of regional structures and local self-government bodies. There is a widespread opinion in society about the uselessness of participation in elections - “the way people vote, nothing will change in the country”.
According to the survey of electoral behavior between the presidential elections of 2000 and 2004, the share of Russians who share this opinion increased from 37.9% to 40%, while the share of those holding the opposite point of view decreased from 42.9% to 35.9%. Social discontent among the poor and low-income strata often translates into protest voting "against all" or voting on the basis of the principle "the worse the better." As a result, elections lose their significance as a means of seeking mutual understanding and achieving tolerant relationships in society. The abolition of the minimum threshold for citizens' participation in elections is a confirmation of their transformation into a formality.
Poverty and inequality are closely related concepts. Inequality characterizes the uneven distribution of scarce resources of society: money, power, education and prestige between different segments of the population - this is social inequality. The most common and easiest way to measure inequality is to compare the lowest and highest incomes in a given country. Another way is to analyze the share of family income spent on food: the poorer an individual, the more he spends on food, and vice versa. Inequality characterizes society as a whole, while poverty affects only part of the population. Thus, poverty is the economic and socio-cultural condition of people who have a minimum amount of liquid values ​​and limited access to social benefits. The boundaries of the concept of poverty vary. If there are too many poor, then government spending increases, which will immediately affect the well-being of other segments of the population. The definition of poverty as a condition in which a person's urgent needs exceed his ability to meet them is general in nature, because it does not specify what urgent needs are.
The stratification of society leads to the most negative consequences. Strata of people below the poverty line are being created, which is unacceptable in a developed society. There is a moral stratification of society into "us" and "others", the community of goals, interests, a sense of healthy patriotism are lost. As a result of the division of society, the population of regions and individual citizens into rich and poor, interregional and even interethnic contradictions arise, which leads to the destruction of the unity of Russia. There is an outflow of qualified workers to areas that do not require relevant knowledge, abroad. As a result, the educational and professional potential of society is deteriorating, knowledge-intensive industries are degrading. As a result of the low standard of living, the labor activity of the population decreases, health deteriorates, the birth rate decreases, which leads to demographic crises.

1.2 Trends in inequality
Property and social inequality is a fact of public life in recent years. The destruction of the economic and, along with it, the value system of Soviet society led to the construction of a new scale of significant attitudes and perceptions, in the context of which inequality is perceived as a social norm. Different ages and life experiences, unequal personal adaptability and professional relevance in the new labor market determine not only economic differentiation, but also the value heterogeneity of society. It is socially expedient and necessary from the point of view of the preservation of society so that the observed differentiation does not turn into a pronounced polarization, does not lead to a split and destructive, destructive consequences.
Sociologists conducted a study of a wide variety of statistical data in order to identify historical patterns of fluctuations (fluctuations) in inequality in the distribution of various benefits (primarily economic, but also power) between members of society over several millennia. The result was somewhat unexpected: no clearly expressed tendencies could be identified. Periods of increasing inequality were accompanied by its smoothing out, and then inequality increased again. The only curve that was able to approximate the investigated trends was a sinusoid. This does not mean, however, that such tendencies cannot be identified over historical periods comparable to the life of several, let alone one or two generations. Two parameters can be considered a measure of inequality in different societies:
1. The height of stratification, which is understood as the social distance between the highest and lowest status of a given society;
2. Profile of stratification, which shows the ratio of the number of places (social positions) in the social structure of society as the status rises.
Numerous empirical studies reveal the following historical trends. The higher the level of development of a society, the lower the height of stratification - that is, the social distance separating the highest levels of social positions in a given society from the lowest - are noted in the most backward societies. And vice versa - the higher the level of development of society as a whole, the smaller the size of the height of stratification. In other words, in backward societies, the social upper classes are separated from the social lower classes by an abyss of impenetrable dimensions, while in advanced societies, representatives of the lower strata can treat their elite, if not as equals, then not in the same way as the unattainable "gods" eat quietly enough.
On the development of differentiation processes and the strengthening of social inequalities in modern Russia, there are different points vision. Some researchers talk about the consolidation of existing inequalities and a decrease in the opportunities for social mobility, about the formation and hereditary transmission of a kind of “poverty subculture”. Some scientists believe that the higher the social status of the family, the higher the adolescents assess their life chances and the more among them are those who express a willingness to take responsibility for their lives. This leads to the notion that poverty is fundamentally insurmountable, which means that children are doomed to inherit poverty from their parents. Real material inequality is consolidated among low-income people at the level of consciousness. This is the beginning of the formation of a specific subculture of poverty. Family poverty narrows the life chances of children, and the likelihood of children "inheriting" poverty from their parents is very high. This applies even to the stratum of the “new poor” who have some social and cultural resources.
The stratification profile, that is, its form, also reflects the level of inequality in a given society, although in a slightly different way. So, as this level rises, the profile becomes more and more “sharpened”, as the level of inequality decreases, it “flattens”. In most traditional societies, where levels of inequality are extremely high, the stratification profile takes the form of a steep pyramid. For modern advanced societies, this shape approaches a diamond shape. In the pyramidal profile, the number of layers increases as they approach the bottom. In the diamond-shaped one, the middle layer is the most numerous, and the “bottom” stratum is inferior to it in size. Of course, the pyramidal and rhombic stratification profiles are more likely “ideal types,” while the real stratification profiles of advanced societies look somewhat different.
Social structure In 1992, despite the beginning of market reforms, Russia generally reproduced the type of social structure common to all surveyed countries at that time. On the whole, this form of social profile corresponded to "normal". The situation changed markedly after the reform of the default announced by the government in August 1998. The stratification profile has noticeably "sagged", approaching the cone, which is more characteristic of traditional societies. The “wings”, in which the middle class was localized, seemed to have descended, into those strata of the population that had previously referred themselves to the middle class, moved into the composition of the lower strata. As a result, the main characteristic feature of the newly emerged type of social structure was the "belittling" of the social status of the bulk of Russians.

CHAPTER 2. THE PROBLEM OF POVERTY
2.1 The theoretical aspect of the concept of poverty
Poverty is the economic and sociocultural condition of people who have a minimum amount of liquid values ​​and limited access to social benefits. Poverty is not only a minimum income, but also a special way and style of life, that is, norms of behavior, perception stereotypes and psychology transmitted from generation to generation. Therefore, sociologists speak of poverty as a special subculture.
The essence of social inequality, as already mentioned, lies in the unequal access of various categories of the population to socially significant benefits, scarce resources, and liquid values. The essence of economic inequality lies in the fact that a minority of the population owns most of the national wealth. In other words, the highest incomes are received by the smallest part of society, while the middle and lower ones are received by the majority of the population.
One of the first authors of the concept of poverty was the American scientist Peter Townsend. He took into account the satisfaction of not only physical but also social needs. After all, people are often provided with vital items and services, but they cannot lead the way of life adopted in their society. The emphasis on quality and living conditions allows us to determine the gap between the social position of an individual (or family) and his standard of living.
There are two types of poverty:
1. Absolute poverty is associated with the need for vital resources that provide a person with biological survival. It is about meeting the most basic needs - food, shelter, clothing. The criteria for this type of poverty depend little on the time and place of residence of a person. The specific set of products consumed at the dawn of the development of human society and modern man differs significantly, but it can always be unambiguously judged whether a person is starving or full. Thus, the criteria for absolute poverty are linked to biological characteristics.
2. Relative poverty is determined by comparing it with the generally accepted standard of living that is considered “normal” in a given society. The average standard of living in the developed countries of the West is obviously higher than in the developing countries. Therefore, what will be considered poverty in the countries of the developed West is regarded as a luxury for backward states. So, for example, those people who do not experience difficulties with nutrition, but cannot afford to meet the needs of a higher level (education, cultural recreation, etc.) also fall into the category of relatively poor in the West. Thus, the criteria for relative poverty are based on social characteristics and vary greatly in different eras and in different countries.
In addition to this basic classification of types of poverty, there are other approaches. Thus, they distinguish primary poverty (these are families that lead a rational household, but do not have sufficient financial resources) and secondary poverty (families that have sufficient financial resources, but are in need due to irrational management of the economy). Finally, there is a division into "sustainable" poverty (poverty "inherited") and "floating" (some poor individuals find the opportunity to go to more high level life, but at the same time people with average incomes go broke and go into the category of the poor).
Depending on the level of economic development of the country, poverty covers a significant or insignificant part of the population The share of the population living below the poverty line in Russia, according to preliminary estimates for 2011, increased to 12.8%, according to the head of Rosstat Alexander Surinov.
The highest poverty level was recorded by Rosstat in 1992 - 33.5%; this indicator fell below 20% only in 2004. Throughout the 2000s, the proportion of the poor was rapidly declining. Then the crisis intervened, seriously hitting the level of wages and incomes of Russians. The poverty level increased in 2008, but already in the next crisis year, the department again recorded a decrease - the government indexed pensions several times, inflation decreased.
In the next two years, those whose incomes do not reach the subsistence level, according to the forecast of the Ministry of Economic Development, will become more and more. The turning point in the trend may come only in 2014.
To measure the scale of poverty, sociologists identify the proportion of that part of the country's population (usually expressed as a percentage) that lives near the official line, or threshold, of poverty. The terms “poverty rate”, “poverty rate” and “poverty lines” are also used to denote the scale of poverty.
The poverty threshold is the amount of money officially established as the minimum income that an individual or family only needs to buy food, clothing and housing. It is also called the “poverty rate”. In Russia it got the name - the living wage. The latest available data on the subsistence minimum in the country is 6913 rubles for an adult, 6 146 rubles. - for a child, 5020 rubles. - for a pensioner.
This border is quite flexible. 40 years ago, black-and-white television in the USSR was considered a luxury item available to few. In the 90s, color television appeared in almost every family, and black and white is considered a sign of modest wealth, or relative poverty. Already, those who cannot afford to buy a Japanese TV or computer have moved into the category of relative poverty.
The lower limit of relative poverty is the subsistence minimum and / or the poverty line, and the upper limit is the so-called decent standard of living. A decent standard of living reflects the amount of material wealth that allows a person to satisfy all reasonable needs, lead a fairly comfortable lifestyle, and not feel disadvantaged. The richer a person is, the higher his claims. Poorer people have rather modest ideas about how much money they need to "live normally." The rich inevitably grow ambitions and pretensions. Another trend: the younger the age, the more money is required to live a normal life. Another trend: the higher the education, the higher the level of aspirations. For those who do not have a secondary education, this level is 2 times lower than for those who have a higher education diploma. Finally, the level of claims among residents of Moscow and St. Petersburg is 3 times higher than among residents of rural areas. Thus, the villagers believe that they need much less money than the townspeople. This is due to the fact that life in the countryside is largely based on the products that subsistence farming provides - home-made meat and vegetables from the garden. In addition, the farther from the direct production of vital goods, the more various intermediaries, and therefore, the higher the price of the goods consumed. However, an equally important role here is played by the traditionally lower level of claims of the inhabitants of the province and the lack of influence of the so-called demonstrative consumption due to the nature of the dominant subcultures (for example, visiting a theater, a gym, a cafe).
State funding for education is decreasing. If in 1992 the share of spending on education in the federal budget was 5.85%, then in recent years it has been steadily decreasing, amounting to only 2.45% in 2007. This means that education in Russia is increasingly moving to a paid level. In prestigious secondary special, secondary technical and higher educational institutions there are up to 45 applicants for one budget seat.
Front domestic education the task is to determine what kind of cultural competence is required by the present and future generations of Russians, that is, what kind of sociocultural type of society with the corresponding parameters of social solidarity and personal identity our education should provide. Russia's desire to join the world community of developed industrial states should be supported by the high availability of quality education. Indeed, in modern society, for professions requiring low qualifications, it is decreasing, and the share of professions requiring high qualifications is increasing. The dynamics of increasing demands on a member of a modern developed society leads to the expansion of a cultural model, characteristic of the most progressive social stratum, through the educational system. At the same time, the traditional status markers of personality: social origin, nationality, religion are gradually losing their social significance for the formation of sociocultural identity.
The degree of accessibility of educational services to different strata of the population and the difference in consumer standards of social strata when using elementary educational services looks like this:
- businessmen with a high level of income;
- small and medium-sized entrepreneurs;
- specialists engaged in intellectual work;
- manual workers in industry;
- employed in agriculture;
- service workers;
- employed in temporary, casual work.
As shown by a survey of educational authorities on the issues of accessibility and efficiency of educational services, conducted in 9 federal districts of Russia by employees of the laboratory for approbation and implementation of innovative educational technologies, the country already has restrictions on access to high-quality preschool and school upbringing and education.
Thus, children of businessmen with a high level of income, small and medium-sized entrepreneurs, specialists engaged in intellectual work are the main contingent of child development centers. In this type of preschool educational institutions, 100% of children are covered by medical and pedagogical diagnostics, and over 60% of children and parents receive qualified psychological assistance. The children of businessmen are also the main contributor.
etc.................

Ministry of Education of the Republic of Belarus

Educational institution

"BELARUSIAN STATE UNIVERSITY

INFORMATICS AND RADIO ELECTRONICS "

Department of Humanities

Test

in sociology

on the topic: "SOCIAL STRATIFICATION"

Completed by: student group 802402 Boyko E.N.

Option 19

The concept of social stratification. Sociological theories of social stratification.

Sources and factors of social stratification.

Historical types of social stratification. The role and importance of the middle class in modern society.

1. The concept of social stratification. Sociological theories of social stratification

The very term "social stratification" was borrowed from geology, where it means a sequential change of layers of rocks of different ages. But the first ideas about social stratification are found in Plato (distinguishes three classes: philosophers, guards, farmers and artisans) and Aristotle (also three classes: "very wealthy", "extremely poor", "middle stratum"). 1 Finally, the ideas of the theory of social stratification took shape at the end of the 18th century. thanks to the emergence of the method of sociological analysis.

Consider various definitions of the concept of "social stratification" and highlight the characteristic features.

Social stratification:

it is social differentiation and structuring of inequality between different social strata and groups of the population based on various criteria (social prestige, self-identification, profession, education, level and source of income, etc.); 2

these are hierarchically organized structures of social inequality that exist in any society; 3

these are social differences that become stratification when people are hierarchically located in some dimension of inequality; 4

a set of vertically arranged social strata: poor-rich. five

Thus, the essential features of social stratification are the concepts of "social inequality", "hierarchy", "systemic organization", "vertical structure", "layer, stratum".

The basis of stratification in sociology is inequality, i.e. uneven distribution of rights and privileges, responsibilities and duties, power and influence.

Inequality and poverty are concepts closely related to social stratification. Inequality characterizes the uneven distribution of scarce resources of society - income, power, education, and prestige - between different strata or strata of the population. The main measure of inequality is the amount of liquid assets. This function is usually performed by money (in primitive societies, inequality was expressed in the number of small and cattle, shells, etc.).

Poverty is not only a minimum income, but a special way and style of life, passed from generation to generation, norms of behavior, perception stereotypes and psychology. Therefore, sociologists speak of poverty as a special subculture.

The essence of social inequality lies in the unequal access of various categories of the population to socially significant benefits, scarce resources, and liquid values. The essence of economic inequality lies in the fact that the minority always owns most of the national wealth, in other words, receives the highest income.

K. Marx and M. Weber were the first to try to explain the nature of social stratification.

The first saw the reason for social stratification in the separation of those who own and manage the means of production, and those who sell their labor. These two classes (the bourgeoisie and the proletariat) have different interests and are opposed to each other, the antagonistic relations between them are built on exploitation. The basis for the separation of classes is the economic system (the nature and mode of production). With this bipolar approach, there is no place for the middle class. It is interesting that the founder of the class approach, K. Marx, did not give a clear definition of the concept of "class". The first definition of class in Marxist sociology was given by V.I.Lenin. Subsequently, this theory had a huge impact on the study of the social structure of Soviet society: first there was a system of two opposing classes, in which there was no place for the middle class with its function of reconciling interests, and then the "destruction" of the exploiting class and the "striving for universal equality" and how follows from the definition of stratification, a classless society. However, in reality, equality was formal, and in Soviet society there were various social groups (nomenklatura, workers, intelligentsia).

M. Weber proposed a multidimensional approach, highlighting three dimensions for characterizing classes: class (economic situation), status (prestige), and party (power). It is these interrelated factors (through income, profession, education, etc.) that underlie, according to Weber, the stratification of society. Unlike Karl Marx, for M. Weber a class is only an indicator of economic stratification, it appears only where market relations arise. For Marx, the concept of class is historically universal.

Nevertheless, in modern sociology, the question of the existence and significance of social inequality, and, therefore, social stratification, occupies a central place. There are two main points of view: conservative and radical. Theories based on the conservative tradition ("inequality is a tool for solving the main problems of society") are called functionalist. 6 Radical theories view social inequality as a mechanism of exploitation. The most developed is the theory of conflict. 7

The functionalist theory of stratification was formulated in 1945 by K. Davis and W. Moore. Stratification exists due to its universality and necessity; society cannot do without stratification. Social order and integration require a certain degree of stratification. The stratification system makes it possible to fill in all the statuses that form the social structure, develops incentives for the individual to perform duties associated with their position. The distribution of material wealth, power functions and social prestige (inequality) depends on the functional significance of the position (status) of the individual. In any society, there are positions that require specific abilities and training. Society must have certain benefits that are used as incentives for people to take positions and fulfill their respective roles. And also certain ways of unequal distribution of these benefits, depending on the positions held. Functionally important positions should be rewarded accordingly. Inequality serves as an emotional stimulus. Benefits are built into the social system, so stratification is a structural feature of all societies. Universal equality would deprive people of the incentive to advance, the desire to make every effort to fulfill their responsibilities. If there are not enough incentives and no statuses are empty, society disintegrates. This theory has a number of disadvantages (it does not take into account the influence of culture, traditions, family, etc.), but it is one of the most developed.

The theory of conflict is based on the ideas of Karl Marx. The stratification of society exists because it is beneficial to individuals or groups who have power over other groups. However, conflict is a common characteristic of human life that is not limited to economic relations. R. Darendorf 8 believed that group conflict is an inevitable aspect of the life of society. R. Collins, within the framework of his concept, proceeded from the conviction that all people are characterized by conflicts due to the antagonism of their interests. 9 The concept is based on three basic principles: 1) people live in the subjective worlds they have constructed; 2) people can have the power to influence or control the subjective experience of an individual; 3) people often try to control the individual who opposes them.

The process and result of social stratification was also considered within the framework of the following theories:

distribution theory of classes (J. Mellier, F. Voltaire, J.-J. Rousaud, D. Diderot, etc.);

the theory of production classes (R. Cantillon, J. Necker, A. Turgot);

theories of utopian socialists (A. Saint-Simon, C. Fourier, L. Blanc and others);

the theory of classes based on social ranks (E. Tord, R. Worms, etc.);

racial theory (L. Gumplovich);

multicriteria class theory (G. Schmoller);

W. Sombart's theory of historical layers;

organizational theory (A. Bogdanov, V. Shulyatikov);

Stronin's multidimensional stratification model;

One of the founders of the modern theory of stratification is P.A. Sorokin. He introduces the concept of "social space" as the totality of all social statuses of a given society, filled with social connections and relationships. The way of organizing this space is stratification. Social space is three-dimensional: each of its dimensions corresponds to one of the three main forms (criteria) of stratification. Social space is described by three axes: economic, political and professional status. Accordingly, the position of an individual or group is described in this space using three coordinates. The aggregate of individuals with similar social coordinates form a stratum. The basis of stratification is the uneven distribution of rights and privileges, responsibilities and duties, power and influence.

Great contribution to the solution of practical and theoretical problems of stratification Russian society contributed by T.I. Zaslavskaya. 10 In her opinion, the social structure of society is the people themselves, organized into various kinds of groups (strata, strata) and performing in the system of economic relations all those social roles that the economy creates, which it requires. It is these people and their groups that carry out a certain social policy, organize the development of the country, and make decisions. Thus, in turn, the social and economic status of these groups, their interests, the nature of their activity and relationships with each other affect the development of the economy.

The degree of social stratification, that is, stratification and inequality, can change over time in the same country. If we compare this indicator in Soviet and post-Soviet Russia, it turns out that social differences between classes and strata in Soviet times were significantly less than now, although this does not mean that Soviet society was “socially homogeneous”.

The upper, most homogeneous, stratum unites economic leaders, representatives of new structures, as well as some specialists from the urban non-technical intelligentsia. They are characterized by a high level of independence of labor and material situation, they are actively involved in power structures and identify themselves with the “elite” and “upper stratum” strata. The second stratum consolidates those employed in state enterprises: lower-level managers, technical specialists, highly skilled workers. They are characterized by moderately autonomous labor, limited participation in power structures, and worse material conditions. They identify themselves with the "upper and middle" and "middle" strata. The third stratum can be defined as marginal: its constituent elements are workers of average and high qualifications, specialists of different profiles, managers of the lower level, etc. Its composition is so heterogeneous that it is even difficult to define the “core”. Nevertheless, it can be noted that people belonging to this stratum are more often engaged in semi-autonomous work, are actually excluded from participation in management, and are at the poverty line. They usually identify themselves with the "below average" stratum. Finally, the fourth stratum is formed by workers of unskilled physical and mental labor in town and country: workers, peasants, office workers. Rural specialists are also close to them. Representatives of this stratum are on the verge of poverty and identify themselves with the “lower stratum”.

The new social structure is characterized by the following tendencies.

1. The social structure of Russian society has gone through a stage of a sharp increase in the possibilities of social mobility: in the first years of perestroika, channels for a rapid “rise” in the social hierarchy were opened for some, and for others - a fall.

2. Sharp social stratification, both in level and in scale .. According to AI Kravchenko, in 1993 in Russia "10% of the richest and 10% of the poorest differ 20 times." In the first half of the 90s in Russia “the upper class of property owners was formed, constituting about 3% of the total population, and the social lower classes of society were formed, whose standard of living was below the poverty line. They were in 1991-1992. about 70% of the population. And so far no one occupies the middle of the social pyramid, "on the one hand," new Russians "have appeared, on the other - new poor.

3. There is an intensive process of formation of new social groups. For example, about 2.5 million people. includes a layer of entrepreneurs that was practically destroyed in the first years of Soviet power.

4. The increase in the number of marginal strata: the unemployed, persons without a fixed place of residence and occupation (homeless people), refugees from the former republics of the USSR and internally displaced persons in Russia itself makes the social structure of modern Russian society unstable.

5. There is an imbalance between such basic stratification parameters as status, prestige, income, education. A good education is not always provided with a decent income, and high income does not always mean a good education.

Poverty problems and methods of its reduction in Russia? Describe the concept of "new poor" in Russia.

Poverty criteria

There are the following types of poverty levels:

• National;
• international.

National poverty rate- This share of population living below the national poverty line. In most countries of the world, including Russia, the national poverty line is understood as income below the subsistence level, i.e. not allowing to cover the cost of the consumer basket - a set of the most necessary goods and services by the standards of a given country at a given period of time. In many developed countries, people with an income of 40-50% of the national average income are considered poor.

International poverty level- This income providing consumption less than $ 2 per day by PPP. They also define the international level of extreme poverty (or otherwise - superpoverty) - income that provides consumption of less than $ 1 per day. This is, in fact, the ultimate poverty level in terms of human survival.

The most important factor in solving the problem of poverty is economic growth, since it is economic growth that leads to an increase in gross national income, due to which the consumption fund is formed. At the same time, it is quite possible that the scale of poverty remains unchanged against the background of good economic growth

At the same time, in the fight against poverty, it is important and state aid the poor, although its increase leads to a decrease in the severity of the problem of poverty, but not to its solution. As the experience of developed countries shows, against the background of the growth of this aid, the so-called stagnant poverty of that part of the working-age population that is desperate to find a job and therefore is psychologically focused only on state aid may increase. As a result, targeted payments of benefits to the poor should be accompanied by a set of socio-economic measures aimed at their involvement in labor activities (vocational training and retraining programs, assistance in finding jobs, etc.).

Eliminating pockets of poverty in the global economy requires broad international support. The problem of poverty is receiving more and more attention from the international community. In 2000, the heads of government of 180 states of the world signed the so-called Millennium Declaration, identifying eight key objectives of world development for the period up to 2015 and calling on international economic organizations to orient their aid programs towards achieving them.

New Poor

Those strata of the population who, in terms of their education and qualifications, social status and demographic situation, have never previously belonged to the lower strata (state employees are employees and workers employed in the public sector and, due to a decrease in living standards, are in this moment near the poverty line).

42. What are the main tasks of Russia's social policy at the present stage?

On the day of his (last) inauguration V.V. Putin signed 3 decrees related to social policy: "On measures to implement state social policy", "On measures to implement demographic policy Russian Federation"And" On measures to implement public policy in the field of education and science ".

The main tasks according to these decrees:

Increase in real wages

Develop professional standards

Expand employee participation in the management of the organization

· Make wages transparent (especially in public institutions)

· Support for Russian culture (awards, exhibitions, assistance to museums, assistance in publications, etc.)

Increase the fertility rate

Increase the average life expectancy to 74 years

Improvement of migration policy (assistance in the device, learning language, culture)

Helping families in need

Helping working mothers

100% preschool education

Development of leading universities and getting from the best universities in the world (5 of ours in the 100 best in the world)

1. INTRODUCTION

Social stratification is a central theme of sociology. She explains the social stratification of the poor, the well-to-do and the rich.

In examining the subject of sociology, we found a close connection between the three fundamental concepts of sociology - social structure, social composition, and social stratification. We expressed the structure through a set of statuses and likened it to empty cells of a honeycomb. It is located, as it were, in a horizontal plane, but is created by the social division of labor. In a primitive society there are few statuses and a low level of division of labor, in modern society there are many statuses and a high level of organization of the division of labor.

But no matter how many statuses there are, in the social structure they are equal and functionally linked to each other. But now we filled the empty cells with people, each status turned into a large social group. The set of statuses gave us a new concept - the social composition of the population. And here the groups are equal to each other, they are also located horizontally. Indeed, in terms of social composition, all Russians, women, engineers, non-partisans and housewives are equal.

However, we know that in real life inequality of people plays a huge role. Inequality is the yardstick by which we can place some groups above or below others. Social composition turns into social stratification - a set of vertically arranged social strata, in particular, the poor, the well-to-do, the rich. To use a physical analogy, the social composition is a jumbled collection of iron filings. But then they put down the magnet, and they all lined up in a clear order. Stratification is a "oriented" composition of the population in a certain way.

What is it that "orientates" large social groups? It turns out that society's unequal assessment of the value and role of each status or group. A plumber or janitor is ranked less than a lawyer or a minister. Consequently, high statuses and the people who occupy them are better rewarded, have a greater amount of power, the prestige of their occupation is higher, and the level of education should also be higher. So we got the four main dimensions of stratification are income, power, education, prestige. And that's all, there are no others. Why? But because they exhaust the range of social benefits that people strive for. More precisely, not the benefits themselves (there may just be a lot of them), but access channels to them. Home abroad, luxury car, yacht, holidays in the Canary Islands, etc. - social benefits, which are always in short supply (i.e., highly respected and inaccessible to the majority) and are acquired through access to money and power, which in turn are achieved through high education and personal qualities.

Thus, social structure arises in relation to the social division of labor, and social stratification - in relation to the social distribution of the results of labor, i.e. social benefits.

And it is always unequal. This is how social strata are positioned according to the criterion of unequal access to power, wealth, education and prestige.

2. MEASUREMENT OF STRATIFICATION

Imagine a social space in which the vertical and horizontal distances are not equal. So or approximately so thought of social stratification P. Sorokin - the man who was the first in the world to give a complete theoretical explanation of the phenomenon, and who confirmed his theory with the help of a huge empirical material extending to the whole of human history.

The points in space are social statuses. The distance between the turner and the milling machine is one, it is horizontal, and the distance between the worker and the foreman is different, it is vertical. The master is the boss, the worker is the subordinate. They have different social ranks. Although it can be imagined that the foreman and the worker will be located at an equal distance from each other. This will happen if we consider the one and the other not as a boss and a subordinate, but only as workers performing different labor functions. But then we will go from vertical to horizontal plane.

Curious fact

Among the Alans, the deformation of the skull served as a true indicator of the social differentiation of society: among the leaders of the tribes, the elders of clans and the priesthood, it was elongated.

Inequality of distances between statuses is the main property of stratification. She has four measuring rulers, or axes coordinates. All of them arranged vertically and next to each other:

income,

power,

education,

prestige.

Income is measured in rubles or dollars, which an individual receives (individual income) or family (family income) over a period of time, say one month or a year.

On the coordinate axis, we plot equal intervals, for example, up to $ 5,000, from $ 5001 to $ 10,000, from $ 10001 to $ 15,000, etc. up to $ 75,000 and above.

Education is measured by the number of years of study at a public or private school or university.

Let's say elementary school means 4 years, incomplete secondary - 9 years, upper secondary - 11, college - 4 years, university - 5 years, graduate school - 3 years, doctoral studies - 3 years. Thus, a professor has more than 20 years of formal education behind his back, and a plumber may not even have eight.

power is measured by the number of people who are affected by the decision you make (power- opportunity

Rice. Four dimensions of social stratification. People occupying the same positions in all dimensions constitute one stratum (the figure shows an example of one of the strata).

impose their will or decisions on other people regardless of their desire).

The decisions of the President of Russia apply to 150 million people (whether they are being implemented is another question, although it also concerns the issue of power), and the decisions of the brigadier - to 7-10 people. Three scales of stratification - income, education, and power - have quite objective units of measurement: dollars, years, people. Prestige is outside this range, since it is a subjective indicator.

Prestige is the respect for status that has developed in public opinion.

Since 1947, the National Center for the Study of Public Opinion in the United States has periodically conducted a survey of ordinary Americans selected in a nationwide sample, in order to determine the social prestige of various professions. Respondents are asked to rate each of 90 professions (occupations) on a 5-point scale: excellent (best),

Note: the scale ranges from 100 (highest) to 1 (lowest) points. The second column "scores" shows the average grade received by the given activity in the sample.

good, average, slightly worse than average, worst job. List II included almost all classes from the chief judge, minister and doctor to plumber and janitor. Having calculated the average for each occupation, sociologists received a public assessment of the prestige of each type of work in points. By arranging them in a hierarchical order from the most respected to the least prestigious, they received a rating, or a scale of professional prestige. Unfortunately, in our country, periodic representative polls of the population about professional prestige have never been carried out. Therefore, you will have to use American data (see table).

Comparison of data for different years (1949, 1964, 1972, 1982) shows the stability of the scale of prestige. The highest, middle and lowest prestige during these years was enjoyed by the same types of occupation. Lawyer, doctor, teacher, scientist, banker, pilot, engineer received consistently high marks. Their position on the scale changed insignificantly: the doctor in 1964 was in second place, and in 1982 - in first, the minister took 10th and 11th places, respectively.

If the upper part of the scale is occupied by representatives of creative, intellectual labor, then the lower part is occupied by representatives of the predominantly physical unskilled: driver, welder, carpenter, plumber, janitor. They have the least status respect. People who occupy the same positions in the four dimensions of stratification constitute one stratum.

For each status or individual, you can find a place on any scale.

A classic example is the comparison of a police officer and a college professor. On the scales of education and prestige, the professor is above the policeman, and on the scales of income and power, the policeman is above the professor. Indeed, the professor has less power, his income is somewhat lower than that of a police officer, but the professor has more prestige and years of study. Marking one and the other with dots on each scale and connecting them lines, we get a stratification profile.

Each scale can be considered separately and designated as an independent concept.

Sociology distinguishes three basic types of stratification:

economic (income),

political (power),

professional (prestige)

and many non-basic, for example, cultural speech and age.

Rice. Stratification profile of a college professor and police officer.

3. BELONGING TO A STRATEGY

Affiliation measured by subjective and objective indicators:

subjective indicator - feeling of belonging to this group, identification with it;

objective indicators - income, power, education, prestige.

So, a large fortune, high education, great power and high professional prestige - the necessary conditions so that you can be attributed to the highest stratum of society.

A stratum is a social stratum of people who have similar objective indicators on four scales of stratification.

Concept stratification (stratum - layer, facio- I do) came to sociology from geology, where it denotes the vertical arrangement of layers of various rocks. If you make a cut of the earth's crust at a certain distance, you will find that under the layer of chernozem there is a layer of clay, then sand, etc. Each layer consists of homogeneous elements. So is the stratum - it includes people with the same income, education, power and prestige. There is no stratum of highly educated people in positions of power and powerless poor people in low-profile jobs. The rich belong to the same stratum with the rich, and the middle - with the middle.

In a civilized country, a major mafioso cannot belong to the highest stratum. Although he has very high incomes, possibly a high education and strong power, his occupation does not enjoy high prestige among citizens. It is condemned. Subjectively, he can consider himself a member of the upper class and even approach according to objective indicators. However, he lacks the main thing - the recognition of "significant others."

The "significant others" are two large social groups: members of the upper class and the entire population. The highest stratum will never recognize him as "theirs" because he compromises the entire group as a whole. The population never recognizes mafia activities as a socially approved occupation, since it contradicts the mores, traditions and ideals of the given society.

Let's conclude: belonging to a stratum has two components - subjective (psychological identification with a certain stratum) and objective (social entry into a certain stratum).

Social entry has undergone a certain historical evolution. In primitive society, inequality was insignificant, so there was almost no stratification. With the emergence of slavery, it suddenly intensified. slavery- the form of the most rigid fixation of people in unprivileged strata. Castes- the life-long attachment of the individual to his (but not necessarily unprivileged) stratum. IN medieval Europe lifelong. affiliation is weakened. Estates imply legal attachment to a stratum. The wealthy merchants bought titles of nobility and thus passed on to a higher class. The estates were replaced by classes - open to all strata, not presupposing any legitimate (legal) way of securing one stratum.

4. HISTORICAL TYPES OF STRATIFICATION

Sociology knows the four main types of stratification are slavery, caste, estates and classes. The first three characterize closed societies, and the last type is open.

Closed is a society where social transfers from lower strata to higher strata are either completely prohibited, either substantially limited.

Open called a society where movement from one stratum to another is not officially limited in any way.

Slavery- economic, social and legal form enslavement of people, bordering on complete lack of rights and extreme inequality.

Slavery has evolved historically. There are two forms of it.

At patriarchal slavery (primitive form), the slave had all the rights of the younger member of the family: he lived in the same house with the owners, participated in public life, married free, inherited the owner's property. It was forbidden to kill him.

At classic slavery (mature form) the slave was finally enslaved: he lived in a separate room, did not participate in anything, did not inherit anything, did not marry and did not have a family. He was allowed to be killed. He did not own property, but he himself was considered the property of the owner ("talking tool").

Ancient slavery in Ancient Greece and plantation slavery in the United States until 1865 are closer to the second form, and slavery in Geese of the X-XII centuries is closer to the first. The sources of slavery differ: the antique was replenished mainly through conquests, and servitude was debt, or bonded slavery. The third source is criminals. In medieval China and in the Soviet GULAG (extra-legal slavery), criminals were in the position of slaves.

At a mature stage slavery turns into slavery. When they talk about slavery as a historical type of stratification, they mean its highest stage. Slavery - the only form of social relations in history when one person acts as the property of another, and when the lower stratum is deprived of all rights and freedoms. This is not the case in castes and estates, not to mention classes.

Caste system not as ancient as the slave system, and less widespread. If almost all countries went through slavery, of course to varying degrees, then castes are found only in India and partly in Africa. India is a classic example of a caste society. It arose on the ruins of the slave in the first centuries of the new era.

Castoycall a social group (stratum), membership in which a person owes exclusively to his birth.

He cannot pass from his caste to another during his lifetime. To do this, he needs to be born again. The caste position is fixed by the Hindu religion (it is now understandable why castes are not widespread). According to her canons, people live more than one life. Each person falls into the appropriate caste, depending on what his behavior was in a previous life. If bad, then after the next birth he must fall into a lower caste, and vice versa.

In India 4 main castes: brahmanas (priests), kshatriyas (warriors), vaisheis (merchants), sudras (workers and peasants) and about 5 thousand non-mainstream castes and a podcast. The untouchables are especially worthy - they do not belong to any caste and occupy the lowest position. In the course of industrialization, castes are replaced by classes. The Indian city is becoming more and more class-based, and the village, in which 7/10 of the population lives, remains caste.

Estates precede classes and characterize the feudal societies that existed in Europe from the 4th to the 14th century.

Estate- a social group that has established custom or legal law and inherited rights and obligations.

The estate system, which includes several strata, is characterized by a hierarchy expressed in the inequality of position and privileges. The classic example of the estate organization was Europe, where at the turn of the XIV-XV centuries society was divided into upper class(nobility and clergy) and unprivileged third estate(artisans, merchants, peasants). In the X-XIII centuries, there were three main estates: the clergy, the nobility and the peasantry. In Russia, from the second half of the 18th century, the class division into the nobility, the clergy, the merchants, the peasantry and the bourgeoisie (middle urban strata) was established. Estates were based on land ownership.

The rights and obligations of each class were determined by legal law and sanctified by religious doctrine. Membership in the estate was determined inheritance. Social barriers between estates were quite tough, therefore social mobility existed not so much between as within the estates. Each estate included many layers, ranks, levels, professions, ranks. So, only nobles could be engaged in public service. The aristocracy was considered a military class (chivalry).

The higher the class was in the social hierarchy, the higher was its status. In contrast to castes, inter-class marriages were perfectly tolerated. Individual mobility was sometimes allowed. An ordinary person could become a knight by purchasing a special permit from the ruler. As a relic, this practice has survived in modern England.

5. Social stratification and prospects of civil society in Russia

Russia has experienced more than one wave of restructuring in its history social space when the previous social structure collapsed, the world of values ​​changed, landmarks, patterns and norms of behavior were formed, whole strata perished, new communities were born. On the threshold of the XXI century. Russia is once again going through a complex and contradictory process of renewal.

In order to understand the ongoing changes, it is first necessary to consider the foundations on which the social structure of Soviet society was built before the reforms of the second half of the 1980s.

The nature of the social structure of Soviet Russia can be revealed by analyzing Russian society as a combination of various stratification systems.

In the stratification of Soviet society, permeated by administrative and political control, the statocratic system played a key role. The place of social groups in the party-state hierarchy predetermined the scope of distribution rights, the level of decision-making and the scope of opportunities in all areas. The stability of the political system was ensured by the stability of the position of the ruling elite (“nomenklatura”), in which the key positions were occupied by the political and military elites, and the subordinate position was held by the economic and cultural ones.

For a statocratic society, the fusion of power and property is characteristic; predominance of state ownership; state-monopoly mode of production; dominance of centralized distribution; militarization of the economy; class-layer stratification of the hierarchical type, in which the positions of individuals and social groups are determined by their place in the structure of state power, which extends to the overwhelming majority of material, labor, information resources; social mobility in the form of a top-down selection of the most obedient and loyal people to the system.

A distinctive characteristic of the social structure of a Soviet-type society was that it was not class, although in terms of the parameters of the professional structure and economic differentiation it remained outwardly similar to the stratification of Western societies. As a result of the elimination of the basis of class division - private ownership of the means of production - the classes were gradually destructed.

The monopoly of state property, in principle, cannot give a class society, since all citizens are hired workers of the state, differing only in the amount of powers delegated to them. Distinctive features social groups in the USSR were special functions, formalized as legal inequality of these groups. This inequality led to the isolation of these groups, the destruction of "social elevators" that serve for upward social mobility. Accordingly, the everyday life and consumption of elite groups acquired an increasingly symbolic character, recalling the phenomenon called "prestigious consumption." All these features make up the picture of class society.

Estates stratification is inherent in a society in which economic relations are rudimentary and do not play a differentiating role, and the main mechanism of social regulation is the state, dividing people into legal unequal estates.

From the first years of Soviet power, for example, the peasantry was formed into a special class: its political rights were limited until 1936. The inequality of the rights of workers and peasants manifested itself for many years (attachment to collective farms through the system of a passport-free regime, privileges for workers in obtaining education and promotion, registration system, etc.). In fact, the workers of the party-state apparatus have turned into a special class with a whole range of special rights and privileges. In the legal and administrative order, the social status of the mass and heterogeneous class of prisoners was fixed.

In the 60s and 70s. in the conditions of a chronic shortage and limited purchasing power of money, the process of leveling wages intensifies, while the consumer market is simultaneously split into closed “special sectors” and the role of privileges is growing. The material and social situation of the groups involved in distribution processes in the sphere of trade, supply, and transport has improved. The social influence of these groups increased as the shortage of goods and services worsened. During this period, shadow socio-economic ties and associations arise and develop. A more open type is being formed public relations: in economics, the bureaucracy acquires the ability to achieve the most favorable results for itself; the spirit of entrepreneurship also embraces the lower social strata - numerous groups of private traders, manufacturers of "leftist" products, builders - "shabashniks" are being formed. Thus, there is a doubling of the social structure, when fundamentally different social groups coexist within its framework.

Important social changes that took place in the Soviet Union in 1965-1985 are associated with the development of the scientific and technological revolution, urbanization and, accordingly, an increase in the general level of education.

From the early 60s to the mid 80s. more than 35 million inhabitants migrated to the city. However, urbanization in our country was clearly deformed: the massive movement of rural migrants to the city was not accompanied by the corresponding deployment of social infrastructure. A huge mass of superfluous people, social outsiders, has appeared. Having lost touch with the rural subculture and unable to join the urban one, migrants created a typically marginal subculture.

The figure of a migrant from village to city is the classic model of the marginal: no longer a peasant, not yet a worker; the norms of the village subculture have been undermined, the urban subculture has not yet been assimilated. The main sign of marginalization is the rupture of social, economic, and spiritual ties.

The economic reasons for marginalization were the extensive development of the Soviet economy, the dominance of outdated technologies and primitive forms of labor, the inadequacy of the education system to the real needs of production, etc. Closely connected with this social reasons marginalization - hypertrophy of the accumulation fund to the detriment of the consumption fund, which gave rise to an extremely low standard of living and a shortage of goods. Among the political and legal reasons for the marginalization of society, the main one is that during the Soviet period in the country there was a destruction of any kind of social ties "horizontally". The state strove for global domination over all spheres of public life, deforming civil society, minimizing the autonomy and independence of individuals and social groups.

In the 60-80s. an increase in the general level of education, the development of an urban subculture gave rise to a more complex and differentiated social structure. In the early 80s. specialists with higher or specialized secondary education accounted for 40% of the urban population.

By the beginning of the 90s. in terms of educational level and professional positions, the Soviet middle stratum was not inferior to the Western "new middle class." In this regard, the English political scientist R. Sakwa noted: "The communist regime gave rise to a kind of paradox: millions of people were bourgeois in their culture and aspirations, but were included in the socio-economic system that denied these aspirations."

Under the influence of socio-economic and political reforms in the second half of the 80s. great changes have taken place in Russia. Compared to Soviet times, the structure of Russian society has undergone significant changes, although it retains many of the former features. The transformation of the institutions of Russian society has seriously affected its social structure: the relations of property and power have changed and continue to change, new social groups appear, the level and quality of life of each social group is changing, and the mechanism of social stratification is being rebuilt.

As an initial model of the multidimensional stratification of modern Russia, we will take four main parameters: power, prestige of professions, income level, and education level.

Power is the most important dimension of social stratification. Power is necessary for the stable existence of any socio-political system; the most important public interests are intertwined in it. The system of power bodies in post-Soviet Russia has been significantly rebuilt - some of them have been eliminated, others are only organized, some have changed their functions, they have been updated. personnel... The previously closed upper stratum of society opened up slightly to people from other groups.

The place of the monolith of the nomenklatura pyramid was taken by numerous elite groups that are in a relationship of competition with each other. The elite have lost much of the leverage of the old ruling class. This led to a gradual transition from political and ideological methods of management to economic ones. Instead of a stable ruling class with strong vertical ties between its floors, many elite groups have been created, between which horizontal ties have been strengthened.

The sphere of management activity, where the role of political power has increased, is the redistribution of accumulated wealth. Direct or indirect involvement in the redistribution of state property is in modern Russia the most important factor determining the social status of management groups.

The social structure of modern Russia retains the features of the former statocratic society built on power hierarchies. However, at the same time, a revival of economic classes begins on the basis of privatized state property. There is a transition from stratification on the basis of power (appropriation through privileges, distribution in accordance with the place of the individual in the party-state hierarchy) to the stratification of the proprietary type (appropriation according to the size of profit and market-valued labor). Alongside the power hierarchies, an “entrepreneurial structure” appears, which includes the following main groups: 1) large and medium-sized entrepreneurs; 2) small entrepreneurs (owners and managers of firms with minimal use of hired labor); 3) independent workers; 4) employees.

There is a tendency towards the formation of new social groups claiming high places in the hierarchy of social prestige.

The prestige of the professions is the second important dimension of social stratification. We can talk about a number of fundamentally new trends in professional structure associated with the emergence of new prestigious social roles... The set of professions becomes more complicated, their comparative attractiveness changes in favor of those that provide more solid and faster material rewards. In this regard, assessments of the social prestige of various types of activity change, when physically or ethically “dirty” work is still considered attractive in terms of monetary reward.

The newly emerging and therefore “scarce” in terms of personnel, the financial sphere, business, commerce are filled with a large number of semi- and non-professionals. Whole professional strata have been sunk to the bottom of social rating scales - their special training turned out to be unclaimed and the income from it is negligible.

The role of the intelligentsia in society has changed. As a result of the reduction state support science, education, culture and art, there was a decline in the prestige and social status of knowledge workers.

In modern conditions in Russia there is a tendency to form a number of social strata belonging to the middle class - these are entrepreneurs, managers, certain categories of the intelligentsia, highly qualified workers. But this trend is contradictory, since the common interests of various social strata, potentially forming the middle class, are not supported by the processes of their convergence according to such important criteria as the prestige of the profession and the level of income.

Income level different groups is the third essential parameter of social stratification. Economic status is the most important indicator of social stratification, because the level of income influences such aspects of social status as the type of consumption and lifestyle, the opportunity to do business, to get promoted, to give children a good education, etc.

In 1997, the income received by the 10% of the richest Russians was almost 27 times higher than the income of the poorest 10%. The 20% of the wealthiest strata accounted for 47.5% of the total cash income, while the 20% of the poorest got only 5.4%. 4% of Russians are super-well-off - their incomes are about 300 times higher than the incomes of the bulk of the population.

The most acute at present in social sphere there is a problem of mass poverty - there is a conservation of the beggarly existence of almost 1/3 of the country's population. Of particular concern is the change in the composition of the poor: today they include not only the traditionally low-income (disabled, pensioners, families with many children), but the ranks of the poor have been joined by the unemployed and employed, whose wages (and this is a quarter of all employed in enterprises) are below the subsistence level. Almost 64% of the population have incomes below the average level (the average income is considered to be 8-10 minimum sizes pay per person) (see: Zaslavskaya T.I. Social structure of a modern and a certain society // Social sciences and modernity. 1997 No. 2. P. 17).

One of the manifestations of the declining standard of living of a significant part of the population is the growing need for secondary employment. However, define real scale secondary employment and additional earning (bringing even higher income than the main job) is not possible. The criteria used today in Russia provide only a conditional description of the structure of the population's income, the data obtained are often limited and incomplete. Nevertheless, social stratification on economic basis testifies to the ongoing process of restructuring of Russian society with great intensity. It was artificially limited in Soviet times and is openly developing

The deepening of the processes of social differentiation of groups by income level begins to have a noticeable impact on the education system.

The level of education is another important criterion of stratification; education is one of the main channels of vertical mobility. During the Soviet period, higher education was accessible to many segments of the population, and secondary education was compulsory. However, such an education system was ineffective, graduate School trained specialists without taking into account the real needs of society.

In modern Russia, the breadth of educational offerings is becoming a new differentiating factor.

In the new high-status groups, obtaining a scarce and high-quality education is considered not only prestigious, but also functionally important.

Newly emerging professions require more qualifications and better training, and are better paid. As a consequence, education is becoming an increasingly important factor at the entrance to the professional hierarchy. As a result, social mobility increases. It is less and less dependent on the social characteristics of the family and is more determined by personal qualities and the education of the individual.

An analysis of the changes taking place in the system of social stratification according to four main parameters, speaks of the depth, contradictions of the transformation process that Russia is experiencing and allows us to conclude that today it continues to retain the old pyramidal shape (characteristic of pre-industrial society), although the content characteristics of its constituent layers have changed significantly.

Six strata can be distinguished in the social structure of modern Russia: 1) the top - the economic, political and power elite; 2) upper middle - medium and large entrepreneurs; 3) medium - small entrepreneurs, managers of the production sphere, the highest intelligentsia, the working elite, professional military personnel; 4) basic - the mass intelligentsia, the bulk of the working class, peasants, trade and service workers; 5) bottom - unskilled workers, long-term unemployed, lonely pensioners; 6) "social bottom" - homeless, released from prison, etc.

At the same time, a number of significant clarifications should be made related to the processes of changing the stratification system in the process of reforms:

Majority social entities is of a mutually transitive nature, has fuzzy, vague boundaries;

There is no internal unity of the newly emerging social groups;

There is a total marginalization of practically all social groups;

The new Russian state does not ensure the safety of citizens and does not alleviate their economic situation. In turn, these dysfunctions of the state deform the social structure of society, give it a criminal character;

The criminal nature of class formation gives rise to the growing property polarization of society;

The current level of income cannot stimulate labor and business activity of the bulk of the economically active population;

In Russia, a segment of the population remains that can be called a potential resource of the middle class. Today, about 15% of those employed in the national economy can be attributed to this stratum, but its maturation to the "critical mass" will take a lot of time. So far, in Russia, the socio-economic priorities characteristic of the "classical" middle class can be observed only in the upper strata of the social hierarchy.

A significant transformation of the structure of Russian society, which requires the transformation of the institutions of property and power, is a long-term process. In the meantime, the stratification of society will continue to lose its rigidity and uniqueness, acquiring the form of a blurred system in which layer and class structures are intertwined.

Of course, the formation of a civil society should become the guarantor of the process of Russia's renewal.

The problem of civil society in our country is of particular theoretical and practical interest. By the nature of the dominant role of the state, Russia was initially closer to the eastern type of society, but in our country this role was expressed even more vividly. According to A. Gramsci, "in Russia the state represents everything, and civil society is primitive and vague."

In contrast to the West, a different type of social system has developed in Russia, which is based on the effectiveness of power, not the effectiveness of property. It should also take into account the fact that for a long time in Russia there were practically no public organizations and remained undeveloped such values ​​as the inviolability of the individual and private property, legal thinking, which constitute the context of civil society in the West, the social initiative belonged not to associations of individuals, but to the bureaucratic apparatus.

From the second half of the XIX century. the problem of civil society began to be developed in Russian social and scientific thought (B.N. Chicherin, E.N. Trubetskoy, S.L., Frank, etc.). The formation of civil society in Russia begins during the reign of Alexander I. It was at this time that certain spheres of civil life emerged that were not associated with military and court officials - salons, clubs, etc. As a result of the reforms of Alexander II, zemstvos, various unions of entrepreneurs, institutions of charity, and cultural societies appeared. However, the process of the formation of civil society was interrupted by the revolution of 1917. Totalitarianism blocked the very possibility of the emergence and development of civil society.

The era of totalitarianism led to a grandiose leveling of all members of society in front of an all-powerful state, the washing out of any groups pursuing private interests. The totalitarian state significantly narrowed the autonomy of sociality and civil society, securing control over all spheres of public life.

The peculiarity of the current situation in Russia is that the elements of civil society have to be created anew in many respects. Let's highlight the most fundamental directions of the formation of civil society in modern Russia:

Formation and development of new economic relations, including pluralism of forms of ownership and the market, as well as the resulting open social structure of society;

The emergence of a system of real interests adequate to this structure, uniting individuals, social groups and strata into a single community;

The emergence of various forms of labor associations, social and cultural associations, social and political movements that make up the main institutions of civil society;

Renewal of relationships between social groups and communities (national, professional, regional, gender and age, etc.);

Creation of economic, social and spiritual prerequisites for the creative self-realization of the individual;

Formation and deployment of mechanisms of social self-regulation and self-government at all levels of the social organism.

The ideas of civil society found themselves in post-communist Russia in that peculiar context that distinguishes our country both from Western states (with their strongest mechanisms of rational legal relations) and from the countries of the East (with their specificity of traditional primary groups). Unlike Western countries, the modern Russian state does not deal with a structured society, but, on the one hand, with rapidly emerging elite groups, and on the other, with an amorphous, atomized society in which individual consumer interests prevail. Today, civil society in Russia is not developed, many of its elements are ousted or "blocked", although over the years of reform there have been significant changes in the direction of its formation.

Modern Russian society is quasi-civil, its structures and institutions have many formal features of the formations of a civil society. There are up to 50 thousand voluntary associations in the country - consumer associations, trade unions, environmental groups, political clubs, etc. However, many of them, having survived at the turn of the 80-90s. a short period of rapid growth, in recent years they have become bureaucratic, weakened, lost activity. The ordinary Russian underestimates group self-organization, and the most common social type is the individual, closed in his aspirations for himself and his family. Overcoming this state, conditioned by the transformation process, is the specificity of the current stage of development.

1. Social stratification - a system of social inequality, consisting of a set of interrelated and hierarchically organized social strata (strata). The stratification system is formed on the basis of such characteristics as the prestige of professions, the amount of power, the level of income and the level of education.

2. The theory of stratification makes it possible to model the political pyramid of society, to identify and take into account the interests of individual social groups, to determine the level of their political activity, the degree of influence on political decision-making.

3. The main purpose of civil society is to achieve consensus between different social groups and interests. Civil society is a set of social formations, united specifically) by economic, ethnic, cultural, etc. interests realized outside the sphere of state activity.

4. The formation of civil society in Russia is associated with significant changes in the social structure. The new social hierarchy differs in many respects from the one that existed during the Soviet era and is characterized by extreme instability. The mechanisms of stratification are being rebuilt, social mobility is increasing, and many marginal groups with an undefined status are emerging. Objective opportunities for the formation of a middle class are beginning to take shape. For a significant transformation of the structure of Russian society, it is necessary to transform the institutions of property and power, accompanied by a blurring of boundaries between groups, a change in group interests and social interactions.

Literature

1. Sorokin P.A. Man, civilization, society. - M., 1992.

2. Zharova L.N., Mishina I.A. The history of homeland. - M., 1992.

3. HessIN., Markgon E., Stein P. Sociology. V.4., 1991.

4. Vselensky M.S. Nomenclature. - M., 1991.

5. Ilyin V.I. The main contours of the system of social stratification of society // Rubezh. 1991. No. 1. P.96-108.

6. Smelzer N. Sociology. - M., 1994.

7. Komarov M.S. Social stratification and social structure // Sotsiol. issled. 1992. No. 7.

8. Giddens A. Stratification and class structure // Sotsiol. issled. 1992. No. 11.

9. Political Science, ed. Prof. M.A. Vasilika M., 1999

9. A.I. Kravchenko Sociology - Yekaterinburg, 2000.

There is a part of the social system, which acts as a set of the most stable elements and their connections, ensuring the functioning and reproduction of the system. It expresses the objective division of society into, classes, strata, indicating the different position of people in relation to each other. The social structure forms the frame of the social system and largely determines the stability of society and its qualitative characteristics as a social organism.

The concept of stratification (from lat. stratum- layer, layer) denotes the stratification of society, differences in social status its members. Social stratificationIs a system of social inequality, consisting of hierarchically arranged social strata (strata). All people belonging to a particular stratum occupy approximately the same position and have common status features.

Different sociologists explain differently the reasons for social inequality and, consequently, social stratification. So, according to Marxist School of Sociology, inequality is based on property relations, the nature, degree and form of ownership of the means of production. According to functionalists (K. Davis, W. Moore), the distribution of individuals by social strata depends on the importance of their professional activity and contribution which they contribute by their labor to the achievement of the goals of society. Supporters exchange theory(J. Homans) believe that inequality in society arises due to unequal exchange of the results of human activity.

A number of classics of sociology considered the problem of stratification more broadly. For example, M. Weber, in addition to economic (attitudes towards property and income), proposed in addition such criteria as social prestige(inherited and acquired status) and belonging to certain political circles, hence - power, authority and influence.

One of creators P. Sorokin identified three types of stratification structures:

• economic(according to the criteria of income and wealth);
• political(according to the criteria of influence and power);
• professional(according to the criteria of mastery, professional skills, successful performance of social roles).

The founder structural functionalism T. Parsons proposed three groups of differentiating features:

• the qualitative characteristics of people that they possess from birth (ethnicity, family ties, gender and age characteristics, personal qualities and abilities);
• role characteristics determined by the set of roles performed by an individual in society (education, position, different kinds professional and labor activity);
• characteristics due to the possession of material and spiritual values ​​(wealth, property, privileges, the ability to influence and control other people, etc.).

In modern sociology, it is customary to distinguish the following main criteria for social stratification:

• income - the amount of cash receipts for certain period(month year);
• wealth - accumulated income, i.e. the amount of cash or materialized money (in the second case, they act in the form of movable or immovable property);
• power - the ability and ability to exercise one's will, to exert a decisive influence on the activities of other people through various means (authority, law, violence, etc.). Power is measured by the number of people it extends to;
• education - a set of knowledge, skills and abilities acquired in the learning process. Educational level is measured by the number of years of study;
• prestige — public appraisal attractiveness, significance of a particular profession, position, a certain occupation.

Despite the variety of different models of social stratification currently existing in sociology, most scientists distinguish three main classes: higher, middle and lower. Moreover, the share of the upper class in industrially developed societies is approximately 5-7%; middle - 60-80% and lower - 13-35%.

In some cases, sociologists carry out a certain division within each class. So, the American sociologist W.L. Warner(1898-1970) in his famous study "Yankee City" identified six classes:

• upper-upper class(representatives of influential and wealthy dynasties with significant resources of power, wealth and prestige);
• lower-upper class("New rich" - bankers, politicians who do not have a noble birth and did not manage to create powerful role-playing clans);
• upper-middle class(successful businessmen, lawyers, entrepreneurs, scientists, managers, doctors, engineers, journalists, cultural and art workers);
• lower-middle class(employees - engineers, clerks, secretaries, office workers and other categories, which are commonly called "white collars");
• upper-lower class(workers engaged primarily in manual labor);
• lower-lower class(beggars, unemployed, homeless, foreign workers, declassed elements).

There are also other schemes of social stratification. But they all boil down to the following: minority classes arise due to the addition of strata and strata within one of the major classes - the rich, the well-to-do and the poor.

Thus, social stratification is based on natural and social inequality between people, which manifests itself in their social life and has a hierarchical character. It is steadily supported and regulated by various social institutions, is constantly reproduced and modified, which is an important condition for the functioning and development of any society.