An Explanation of Class Inequality

There are some things that no matter how I try to explain them, will fall on deaf ears, because at the end of the day, I'm simply a student. I have no qualifications, and my words are easily dismissed. This has been excerpted from a text I am currently reading. To many, this information is (or should be) common knowledge. Yet there are so few who believe it.

Stratification and Ideology

The power of a dominant class or ethnic group is not simply the power of force but also the power to propound and sustain an ideology that legitimizes the system of inequality. Although coercion is always at the root of obedience to authority, and all dominant groups use force when the need arises, coercive techniques are commonly used only in societies where the prevailing system is not accepted by a significant part of the populace.

The use of raw force alone, however, cannot be effective in prompting compliance with a system of inequality over long periods. The stability of systems that rely primarily on coercion is always precarious. For government and other supportive institutions of the dominant group to establish and maintain ruling system that is popularly supported over many generations requires that power be legitimized in less repressive and less direct ways. In protecting their privileges, dominant groups try to engender loyalty and respect among subordinates, not fear (Jackman, 1994).

People must come to see the inequalities in power and wealth as just and even socially beneficial. Only then do systems of social inequality attain stability. When this is accomplished, ruling groups need no longer resort to force as the principle means of assuring their power and privilege. Such long-range stability and legitimacy require the development of an effective ideology and its communication through socialization.

Despite their acceptance -- usually reflexively -- by both ruling groups and masses, the fundamental ideological values tend to accommodate mostly the interests of the society's ruling groups. In the United States, for example, the dominant explanation for social inequality centers on the belief that the society's opportunity structure is open, providing equal chances for all to achieve material success or political power, regardless of their social origins. This presumably being the case, each person controls his or her placement in the social hierarchy.

Social success, then, is explained as the result of one's willingness to work hard; failure is the product of lack of ambition or desire to improve oneself. Differences in wealth and power are not denied, but they are seen as the result of individual factors rather than the workings of a class system that ordinarily engenders success for the well born and failure for the poor. In reality, however, the opportunity structure is hardly equal, and the dominant values of individualism, competition, and achievement favor those who are wealthy and can easily avail themselves of the opportunities for success. The social system then, tends to favor those who are already wealthy and powerful.

~ Race & Ethnic Relations: American and Global Perspectives // Martin N. Marger

Food for thought.