The Negative Effects of Social Stratification, Essay Example

Social stratification is the fragmentation of society based on the economic power they wield and putting them into different groups that have carried access to social amenities and resources. The strata that you belong to becomes the standard that will be applied in evaluating you and determining how well you are viewed in the society.  The social strata being based on economic capabilities and limits those that belong to the lower cadres of the society in terms of the access they have to social amenities as well as the social progress that they can earn from their efforts. Other biases that inform the class divide include race gender and other differentiating factors like religious believes. Whichever the system of stratification it tends to put those with the most wealth power or prestige or a combination of them all at the top of the hierarchy (Wagner 2009).

The social stratification has produced a group of people called as the underclass, these people have limited access to education hence they rarely complete their studies. This limits the access they have to employment and by extension their chances to make good their education and break the poverty barrier. This signifies a failure of the meritocratic system which seeks to reward people based on their excellence and performance. The fact that the meritocratic system does not put into consideration the effort expended on achieving the results is the first negative effect of social stratification.  This results in a class of people who are well paid for doing less work while others do more and are paid less such as fire-fighters and managers (Wagner 2009). The people occupying the lower cadres such as labourers are paid pathetic wages while they do the donkey work, this eventually condemns them into what is referred to as the underclass as a different group of the managerial elite enjoy the fruits of their  sweat.

The second negative impact of social stratification is the harnessing of national and natural resources among small group of elites who belong to the higher class of the social strata. This is demonstrated by the fact that 15% of the population owns 40% of the national resources and wealth (Rotchild 1995).  This implies that the underclass is left to share the remnants of the system. This has bred a system similar to that of Carl max referred to as made up of the bourgeoisie who are the rich land owners and the proletariat who are their servants and workers.  The grim statistics therefore imply that the rest of the society is left to share very little of the remaining national resources. This not only limits their chances at social progression but also makes them subject to stiff competition for the limited available resources. With the stiff competition comes social anarchy and crime

The third problem that comes with the social stratification is the cycle of poverty. As Geraldine further explains, the children born into the homes of the underclass face enormous problems in their growth and education. First they have limited sources of the necessary academic materials that would aid their progress. This is due to the fact that they do not have access to good schools that are seen as the preserve of the high and mighty. Due to this they can hardly scrap through the grades at school. The social pressures in the inner estates are so high these children either drop out of school at an early age, get into drugs to escape the harsh realities or get pregnant while they are still young. In this way they do not stand a chance of getting out of the underclass that they have seemingly been condemned to.  They move on to bear children who are also trapped in the same circle. The fact that these people are stuck in one social circle underline the impact that social stratification has on the society. This pays very little attention to the fact that of these kids that never got a chance to prove their capabilities, there are those that are immensely talented and would have made it if they had similar resources as those of the higher class.

In conclusion the social stratum that has been established albeit on very biased basis has acted to dictate the progress that one makes in the society. The classes pay little attention to the resource limitations that people from these low classes face. Though arguments may be fronted in favour of the system as being appropriate for meritocracy , little attention is paid to the misconceptions that exist regarding the remuneration of different individuals not based on the work they do but on the esteem inn which such work is held in by the society. Most important  is the fact that the social stratification limits the pool of human resource available for developing the community to group of select few. This means that those very talented individuals who belong to the underclass never get an opportunity to contribute to forward communal progression. This definitely limits the rate at which our societies develop.

References

Rotchild, J. (1995). Wealth static wages, except for the rich. Time magazine, 145 (4), 60-61.

Wagner G (2009).The Underclass in America. EBSCO Research Starters. EBSCO Publishing Company