People are in constant motion, and society is in development. The totality of social movements of people in society, i.e. changes in their status is called social mobility.
Under social mobility refers to the movement of an individual or group up, down or horizontally. Social mobility is characterized by the direction, type and distance of social movements of people in society (individually and in groups).
Human history is made up not only of individual movements, but also of the movements of large social groups. The landed aristocracy is being replaced by the financial bourgeoisie, low-skilled professions are being forced out of modern production by representatives of the so-called “white collar” workers - engineers, programmers, operators of robotic complexes. Wars and revolutions reshaped the social structure of society, raising some to the top of the pyramid and lowering others.
Similar changes took place in Russian society after the October Revolution of 1917. They are still happening today, when the business elite replaced the party elite.
The up and down movement is called vertical mobility, it comes in two types: top-down (top-down) and bottom-up (bottom-up). Horizontal mobility is a movement in which an individual changes his social status or profession to one of equal value. A special variety is intergenerational, or intergenerational, mobility. It refers to the change in the status of children compared to that of their parents. Intergenerational mobility was studied by A.V. Kirch, and in the global historical aspect - A. Pirenne and L. Febvre. One of the founders of the theories of social stratification and social mobility was P. Sorokin. Foreign sociologists usually connect these two theories.
Soviet sociologists used different terms. They called the transition between classes interclass movements, and a transition within the same class is intraclass. These terms were introduced into Soviet sociology in the 70s. Interclass movements meant a transition from one class to another, say, if a person comes from working environment He graduated from the Faculty of Philosophy and became a teacher, thus moving into the stratum of the intelligentsia. If a worker, peasant or intellectual increased their level of education and moved from a low-skilled to a medium- or highly skilled position, remaining a worker, peasant or intellectual, then they made intra-class vertical movements.
Exist two main types social mobility - intergenerational and intragenerational, and two main types - vertical and horizontal. They, in turn, are divided into subspecies and subtypes.
Vertical mobility implies movement from one stratum to another. Depending on the direction of movement we talk about upward mobility(social rise, upward movement) and about downward mobility(social descent, downward movement). There is a well-known asymmetry between ascent and descent: everyone wants to go up and no one wants to go down the social ladder. Usually, ascent- phenomenon voluntary, A descent - forced.
Promotion is an example of an individual's upward mobility; dismissal or demotion is an example of downward mobility. Vertical mobility is a person’s change during his life from high to low status or vice versa. For example, the movement of a person from the status of a plumber to the position of president of a corporation, as well as the reverse movement, serves as an example vertical mobility.
Horizontal mobility implies the transition of an individual from one social group to another, located on the same level. Examples include moving from an Orthodox to a Catholic religious group, from one citizenship to another, from one family (parental) to another (one’s own, newly formed), from one profession to another. Such movements occur without a noticeable change in social position in the vertical direction. Horizontal mobility implies a change by a person during his life from one status to another, which is approximately equivalent. Let's say a person was first a plumber and then became a carpenter.
A type of horizontal mobility is geographic mobility. It does not imply a change in status or group, but a movement from one place to another while maintaining the same status. An example is international and interregional tourism, moving from city to village and back, moving from one enterprise to another.
If a change of location is added to a change of status, then geographic mobility becomes migration. If villager came to the city to visit relatives, then this is geographical mobility. If he moved to the city for permanent residence and got a job here, then this is already migration.
The classification of social mobility can be carried out according to other criteria. So, for example, they distinguish individual mobility, when downward, upward or horizontal movements occur in an individual independently of others, and group mobility, when movements occur collectively, for example after a social revolution, the old ruling class gives way to a new ruling class.
On other grounds, mobility may be classified into, say, spontaneous or organized. An example of spontaneous mobility is the movement of residents of neighboring countries to large cities in Russia for the purpose of earning money. Organized mobility (the movement of individuals or entire groups up, down or horizontally) is controlled by the state. These movements can be carried out: a) with the consent of the people themselves, b) without their consent. An example of organized voluntary mobility in Soviet time may be the movement of young people from different cities and villages to Komsomol construction sites, the development of virgin lands, etc. An example of organized involuntary mobility is repatriation(resettlement) of Chechens and Ingush during the war with German Nazism.
It is necessary to distinguish from organized mobility structural mobility. It is caused by changes in the structure of the national economy and occurs beyond the will and consciousness of individuals. For example, the disappearance or reduction of industries or professions leads to the displacement of large masses of people.
Social mobility can be measured using two indicator systems. In the first system, the unit of account is individual, in the second - status. Let us first consider the first system.
Under volume of mobility refers to the number of individuals who have moved vertically up the social ladder over a certain period of time. If the volume is calculated by the number of individuals who have moved, then it is called absolute, and if the ratio of this quantity over the entire population, then relative volume and is indicated as a percentage.
Total the volume, or scale, of mobility determines the number of movements across all strata together, and differentiated - by individual strata, layers, classes. The fact that in an industrial society two thirds of the population are mobile refers to the aggregate volume, and 37% of the children of workers who become employees refers to the differentiated volume.
The scale of social mobility is defined as the percentage of those who changed their social status in comparison with their fathers. When Hungary was capitalist, i.e. in the 30s, the scale of mobility was 50%. In socialist Hungary (60s) it rose to 64%, and in 1983 to 72%. As a result of socialist transformations, Hungarian society became as open as developed capitalist countries.
With good reason, this conclusion applies to the USSR. Western European and American scientists who conducted comparative studies found that in Eastern European countries mobility is higher than in developed capitalist countries.
Changes in mobility across individual strata are described by two indicators. The first one is coefficient of mobility of exit from the social stratum. It shows, for example, how many sons of skilled workers became intellectuals or peasants. Second - coefficient of mobility of entry into the social stratum, indicating from which layers, for example, the layer of intellectuals is replenished. He discovers the social background of people.
Degree of mobility in a society is determined by two factors: the range of mobility in society and the conditions that allow people to move.
Range of mobility(amount of mobility), which characterizes a given society, depends on how many different statuses exist in it. The more statuses, the more opportunities a person has to move from one status to another.
In a traditional society, the number of high-status positions remained approximately constant, so there was moderate downward mobility of offspring from high-status families. Feudal society is characterized by very few vacancies for high positions for those who had low status. Some sociologists believe that, most likely, there was no upward mobility here.
Industrial society expanded range of mobility. It is characterized by a much larger number of different statuses. The first decisive factor in social mobility is the level of economic development. During periods of economic depression, the number of high-status positions decreases and low-status positions expand, so downward mobility dominates. It intensifies during periods when people lose their jobs and at the same time new layers enter the labor market. On the contrary, during periods of active economic development, many new high-status positions appear. Increased demand for workers to keep them busy is the main reason for upward mobility.
The main trend in the development of industrial society is that it simultaneously increases wealth and the number of high-status positions, which in turn leads to an increase in the size of the middle class, whose ranks are replenished by people from lower strata.
The second factor of social mobility is the historical type of stratification. Caste and class societies limit social mobility, placing severe restrictions on any change in status. Such societies are called closed.
If most statuses in a society are ascribed or prescribed, then the range of mobility in it is much lower than in a society built on individual achievement. In pre-industrial society, there was little upward mobility, since legal laws and traditions practically denied peasants access to the landowning class. There is a well-known medieval saying: “Once a peasant, always a peasant.”
In an industrial society, which sociologists classify as open societies, First of all, individual merits and achieved status are valued. In such a society, the level of social mobility is quite high.
Sociologists also note the following pattern: the wider the opportunities for upward mobility, the stronger people believe in the availability of channels of vertical mobility for them, and the more they believe in this, the more they strive to advance, i.e. the higher the level of social mobility in a society. Conversely, in a class society, people do not believe in changing their status without wealth, pedigree, or the patronage of a monarch. In 1986, Gallup conducted a comparative study of the two countries: 45% of Britons said that main way advance in life - inheriting the wealth and status of parents; while 43% of Americans, on the contrary, considered “hard work and personal effort” to be the only way to achieve success. In England there are strong vestiges of class. Since childhood, the average American has been focused on making his own destiny with his own hands.
When studying social mobility, sociologists pay attention to the following characteristics:
Number and size of classes and status groups;
The amount of mobility of individuals and families from one group to another;
The degree of differentiation of social strata by types of behavior (lifestyle) and level of class consciousness;
The type or size of property that a person owns, his occupation, as well as the values that determine this or that status;
Distribution of power between classes and status groups.
Of the listed criteria, two are especially important: the volume (or amount) of mobility and the delimitation of status groups. They are used to distinguish one type of stratification from another. The USA and USSR, like most other industrial societies, had an open structure: status was based on achievement and movement up and down the social ladder. Such movements occur quite often. In contrast, in India and most traditional societies the stratification system is closed: status is mostly ascribed and individual mobility is limited.
Upward movement occurs mainly through education, wealth or membership in political party. Education plays an important role not only when an individual receives a higher income or a more prestigious profession: the level of education is one of the hallmarks of belonging to a higher stratum. Wealth serves as a distinctive sign of status in the upper strata. American society is a stratified system with open classes. Although it is not a classless society, it maintains differentiation of people according to social status. This is a society of open classes in the sense that a person does not remain all his life in the class in which he was born.
Let's move on to consider second system of indicators mobility, where the unit of account is taken status or a step in the social hierarchy. In this case social mobility is understood as a change by an individual (group) from one status to another, located vertically or horizontally.
Volume of mobility- this is the number of people who changed their previous status to another down, up or horizontally. Ideas about the movement of people up, down and horizontally in the social pyramid describe direction of mobility. Types of mobility are described typology social movements. Measure of mobility indicated step and volume social movements.
Mobility distance– this is the number of steps that individuals managed to climb or had to descend. A normal distance is considered to be moving one or two steps up or down. Most social movements happen this way. Abnormal distance - an unexpected rise to the top of the social ladder or a fall to its base.
Mobility distance unit stands movement step. To describe the step of social movements, the concept of status is used: movement from a lower to a higher status - upward mobility; moving from a higher to a lower status - downward mobility. Movement can take place one step (status), two or more steps (statuses) up, down and horizontally. A step can be measured in 1) statuses, 2) generations. Therefore, the following types are distinguished:
Intergenerational mobility;
Intragenerational mobility;
Interclass mobility;
Intraclass mobility.
The concept of “group mobility” characterizes a society experiencing social changes, where the social significance of an entire class, estate, or stratum increases or decreases. For example, the October Revolution led to the rise of the Bolsheviks, who previously had no recognized high position, and the Brahmins in ancient India became the highest caste as a result of persistent struggle, whereas previously their caste was on the same level as the Kshatriya caste.
As P. Sorokin showed using vast historical material, the following factors were the reasons for group mobility:
Social revolutions;
Foreign interventions, invasions;
Interstate wars;
Civil Warriors;
Military coups;
Change of political regimes;
Replacing the old constitution with a new one;
Peasant uprisings;
The internecine struggle of aristocratic families;
Creation of an empire.
Group mobility takes place where there is a change in the stratification system itself, i.e. the very foundation of a society.
The geological metaphor that sociologists use to depict social stratification helps explain much about the mechanism of social mobility. However, drawing a mechanical analogy between rocks and social groups in society is fraught with artificial stretches and misunderstanding of the essence of the issue. A rigid analogy with rocks fixed in one place does not allow us to explain, for example, individual mobility. Particles of granite or clay are not able to move to another layer of the earth on their own. However, in human society, individuals, having achieved upward mobility, continually move from one stratum to another. The more democratic a society is, the freer it is to move between strata.
In this regard, authoritarian societies closely resemble a rigidly fixed geological hierarchy. Slaves in Ancient Rome they rarely became free citizens, and medieval peasants could not throw off the yoke of serfdom. Similarly, in India, moving from one caste to another is practically impossible. And in other non-democratic societies, upward mobility was even planned and regulated by the ruling elite. Thus, in the USSR there was a certain quota for the admission into the party and the occupation of leadership positions by people from workers and peasants, while the advancement of representatives of the intelligentsia was artificially restrained.
Thus, the concept of group and individual mobility reveals the most significant difference between social stratification and geological one. The idea of a rigid and immovable hierarchy, borrowed from the sphere of natural sciences, is applicable to social sciences only to a certain extent.
Social mobility in the USSR was somewhat similar to that in the United States. The similarity is explained by the fact that both countries are industrialized powers, and the difference is explained by the uniqueness of their political regimes. Thus, studies by American and Soviet sociologists, covering approximately the same period (70s), but conducted independently of each other, gave the same figures: up to 40% of employees in the USA and Russia come from a working environment, in In the USA and Russia, more than two-thirds of the population is involved in social mobility.
Another pattern is also confirmed: social mobility in both countries is most influenced not by the profession and education of parents, but by the son or daughter’s own achievements. The higher the education, the greater the chances of moving up the social ladder. In both the USA and the USSR, another curious fact was discovered: a well-educated son of a worker has just as much chance of advancement as a poorly educated son of the middle classes, particularly white-collar workers, although the latter may be helped by his parents. A specific feature of the United States is the large influx of immigrants. Unskilled workers - immigrants arriving in the country from all parts of the world - occupy the lower rungs, displacing or hastening Americans to move up. Migration from rural areas had the same effect, and this applies not only to the USA, but also to the USSR.
In both countries, upward mobility was on average 20% higher than downward mobility. But both types of vertical mobility were inferior in level to horizontal mobility. This means the following: both countries have a high level of mobility (up to 70-80% of the population), but 70% is horizontal mobility, i.e. movement within the boundaries of the same class and even layer (stratum).
Even in the USA, where, according to popular belief, every shoe shiner can become a millionaire, the conclusion made back in 1927 by P. Sorokin remains valid: most people begin their working career at the same social level as their parents, and only a very few succeed significantly move up. In other words, the average citizen moves one step up or down during his life, and very few manage to step through several steps at once.
Thus, 10% of Americans, 7% of Japanese and Dutch, 9% of the British, 2% of the French, Germans and Danes, 1% of Italians rise from the working class to the upper middle class. To the factors of individual mobility, i.e. The reasons that allow one person to achieve greater success than another, sociologists in both the USA and the USSR attributed:
Social status of the family;
The level of education;
Nationality;
Physical and mental abilities, external data;
Upbringing;
Location;
A profitable marriage.
Mobile individuals begin socialization in one class and end in another. They are literally torn between dissimilar cultures and lifestyles. They do not know how to behave, dress, talk from the point of view of the standards of another class. Often adaptation to new conditions remains very superficial. A typical example is Molière's tradesman among the nobility. It is generally more difficult for a woman to advance than a man. Promotion social status, often occurs due to an advantageous marriage. This applies not only to women, but also to men.
For seventy years, Soviet society, along with American society, was the most mobile society in the world. Free education available to all classes opened up for everyone the same opportunities for advancement that were available only in the United States. Nowhere else in the world was the elite formed from literally all layers of society.
Sociologists have long noticed this pattern: it is noted that during periods when society is experiencing major changes, groups with an accelerated model of social mobility appear. Thus, in the 30s, “red directors” became people who had recently been workers and peasants, whereas in pre-revolutionary times, in order to achieve the position of “director”, at least 15 years of training and after that another long-term production experience were required. A similar situation was observed in the early and mid-90s, which is confirmed by the research data of R. G. Gromov. While a manager in the public sector needed to go through an average of four to five career stages to achieve the position of “director” (in the period before 1985, this process was even longer), then managers in the private sector reached this position already at the second stage.
However, the mass character in 1985-1993. It was downward mobility that acquired and became dominant, both at the individual and group levels. Very few managed to achieve an increase in status, but the majority of Russians found themselves at the lower levels of social stratification.
Soviet sociologists in the 60-80s quite actively studied inter- and intragenerational, as well as inter- and intraclass mobility. The main classes were the working class and the peasantry, and the intelligentsia was considered a class-like stratum.
Intergenerational mobility suggests that children achieve a higher social position or fall to a lower level than their parents occupied. Example: a miner's son becomes an engineer. Intergenerational mobility is the change in the status of children relative to the status of their fathers. For example, the son of a plumber becomes the president of a corporation, or, conversely, the son of the president of a corporation becomes a plumber. Intergenerational mobility is the most important form of social mobility. Its scale indicates the extent to which in a given society inequality passes from one generation to the next. If intergenerational mobility is low, this means that in a given society inequality has taken deep roots, and a person’s chances of changing his destiny do not depend on himself, but are predetermined by birth. In the case of significant intergenerational mobility, people achieve new status through their own efforts, regardless of their background. The general direction of intergenerational mobility of young people is from the group of manual workers to the group of mental workers.
In the early 70s O.I. Shkaratan and V.O. Rukavishnikov conducted a comparative analysis of structural models of intergenerational dynamics of the social status of fathers and sons in societies that differ in social structure and type of culture. The method of “path” analysis was used, which is most often used in scientific research to build structural models. Research data from the USSR, Czechoslovakia, USA, Japan and Austria were compared. It turned out that the correlation indicators between the social characteristics of the respondent’s father and the respondent himself are close for the USSR and the USA. Thus, the connection between the education of father and son in the USSR is 0.49, in the USA - 0.45; the social and professional status of father and son (at the beginning of their working career) in the USSR is 0.24, in the USA - 0.42, etc. The younger generation in the USSR, USA and other countries is characterized by a close connection between their own education and socio-professional status (USSR - 0.57; USA - 0.60; Czechoslovakia - 0.65; Japan - 0.40; Austria - 0. 43) 411.
International data shows that people from the lower middle class, i.e. “white collar workers”, and the lower layer of the working class, i.e. “blue collar” workers (including unskilled agricultural workers) most rarely inherited their fathers’ professions and were highly mobile. In contrast, members of the upper class and professionals were more likely to inherit their parents' occupation 412 . Thus, a quite obvious pattern can be traced, which is confirmed by a theoretical analysis of the features of the social pyramid: the higher the social rank, the more often the profession is inherited, and the lower it is, the less often the parent’s occupation is inherited.
Peter Blau and Otis Duncan also found out other features of social mobility in American society: the level of professional mobility here turned out to be quite high (the correlation coefficient between the socio-economic statuses of father and son was +0.38). The father's status influences the son's status mainly through education, but the socioeconomic position of the family also influences career opportunities, regardless of education.
It also turned out that rural youth who moved to the city achieve a higher position in comparison with their fathers than native city dwellers in comparison with theirs. Compared to their fathers, the city youth looked as sedentary as a turtle. But only in comparison with their fathers. When comparing rural and urban youth with each other, i.e. When considering intragenerational mobility, the situation turned out to be rather the opposite. It turned out that the larger it was former place residence of a migrant, the greater his chances of professional success in the city. In fact, a direct relationship was identified between the size of the locality and the scale of professional achievements. This is understandable, since in a large and medium-sized industrial center there are more schools, technical schools and colleges, therefore, there are more opportunities to get a good specialty. Whether a resident of these centers remains in place or moves to another city, town or village, his life chances are higher 413.
Intragenerational mobility occurs where the same individual, without comparison with his father, changes social positions several times throughout his life. Otherwise it is called social career. Example: a turner becomes an engineer, and then a workshop manager, a plant director, and a minister of the engineering industry. The first type of mobility refers to long-term, and the second - to short-term processes. In the first case, sociologists are more interested in interclass mobility, and in the second, in the movement from the sphere of physical labor to the sphere of mental labor. Intragenerational mobility depends less on factors of origin in a changing society than in a stable society.
Upward mobility is not unique to America. All industrialized countries with democratic rule, low fertility and an ideology of equal opportunity have a high rate of upward mobility in the period 1945-1965. The USSR belonged to such countries, but it did not have a low birth rate, but there was extensive industrial construction, there was no democratic government, but there were no social barriers, there was an ideology of equal opportunities. During this period, up to 30% changed manual occupations to non-manual ones in the USA, England and other European countries 414. Most of the changes were related to intergenerational mobility—based on comparisons between the statuses of father and son—rather than advancement occurring during the son's lifetime.
The predominance of intergenerational mobility over intragenerational mobility indicates that the structure of the economy is determined mobility coefficient. In other words, the majority of upward and downward movements in the occupational structure, horizontally, can be explained in the light of societal variables rather than individual differences between workers.
If the father is a skilled carpenter (skilled manual worker) and his son is an insurance company employee (“white collar”), then the son's job, educational level, and lifestyle are consistent with a higher status rank than his father. But if most of the son's other peers also advance to the white-collar level, then the positions of the father and son in comparison with all other workers will not undergo significant changes. Relative mobility means that, although the professional structure has changed towards an increase in the share of mental work professions, the positions of father and son relative to other employed people have not changed significantly.
Class immobility occurs when social class rank is reproduced unchanged from generation to generation. Researchers find in modern society high level of class immobility. The bulk of mobility - intra- and intergenerational - occurs gradually, without dramatic changes. Only certain individuals, such as outstanding athletes or rock stars, rise or fall sharply. Success in the United States and other modern societies is determined primarily by ascribed status—marital status. This is facilitated by the so-called deferred compensation - postponing immediate gratification in order to achieve significant future goals 415.
Stratification symbols also differ in the degree of openness of professional cells to newcomers. To a large extent, a married woman's social rank is determined by the status of her husband, and her mobility is measured by the difference between the professional status of her father and her husband.
Because ascribed traits—gender, race, social class by birth—outweigh individual talent and intelligence in determining length of education and type of first job, analysts say there is little reason to speak of a truly open class system.
The term “structural mobility,” or mobility based on demand and social needs, refers to societal factors that influence the mobility rate. Thus, the types and number of available jobs depend on changes in the economic system, while the type and number of people willing to receive this work depends on the birth rate in a particular generation. Based on this, we can estimate the likelihood of upward and downward mobility for different subgroups.
Industrialization opens up new vacancies in vertical mobility. The development of industry three centuries ago required the transformation of the peasantry into the proletariat. At the late stage of industrialization, the working class became the largest part of the employed population. The main factor in vertical mobility was the education system. Industrialization is caused not only by inter-class, but also by intra-class changes. At the stage of conveyor or mass production at the beginning of the 20th century. the predominant group remained low- and unskilled workers. Mechanization and then automation required expanding the ranks of skilled and highly skilled workers. In the 1950s, 40% of workers were low- or unskilled. In 1966, only 20% of them remained.
As unskilled labor declined, the need for employees, managers, and businessmen grew. The sphere of industrial and agricultural labor narrowed, and the sphere of service and management expanded. Structural mobility is most clearly visible in the USA (Table 11.1).
Table 11.1
Dynamics of US structural mobility: 1900-1980
|
Streets | ||
|
Professionals and managers | ||
|
Tradesmen, office workers: “white collar” | ||
|
Manual workers | ||
|
“Blue collar”: servants | ||
|
Farmers and agricultural workers |
Source: Hess R., Markson E., Stien F. Sociology. N.Y., 1991. P. 184.
In an industrial society, the structure of the national economy determines mobility. In other words, professional mobility in the USA, England, Russia or Japan depends not on the individual characteristics of people, but on the structural features of the economy, the correlation of industries and the shifts taking place here. As shown in table. 11.1, number of employees in agriculture The USA decreased by 10 times from 1900 to 1980. Small farmers became a respectable petty bourgeois class, and agricultural workers joined the ranks of the working class. The stratum of professionals and managers doubled during that period. The number of sales workers and clerks increased 4 times.
Similar transformations are characteristic of modern societies: from farm to factory in the early stages of industrialization and from factory to office in the later stages. Today, over 50% of the workforce is engaged in mental work, compared to 10-15% at the beginning of the century.
During this century, industrialized countries saw a decline in blue-collar jobs and an expansion in managerial jobs. But managerial vacancies were filled not by workers, but by the middle class. However, the number of management jobs has grown faster than the number of children in the middle class available to fill them. The vacuum created in the 50s was partially filled by working youth. This was made possible due to the availability of higher education for ordinary Americans.
In developed capitalist countries, industrialization completed earlier than in former socialist countries (USSR, East Germany, Hungary, Bulgaria, etc.). The lag could not but affect social mobility: in capitalist countries, the share of leaders and intellectuals who come from workers and peasants is one third, and in former socialist countries - three quarters. In long-industrialized countries such as England, the proportion of workers of peasant origin is very low; there are more so-called hereditary workers. On the contrary, in Eastern European countries it is very high and sometimes reaches 50%.
It is thanks to structural mobility that the two opposite poles of the professional pyramid turned out to be the least mobile. In the former socialist countries, the two most closed layers were the layer of top managers and the layer of auxiliary workers located at the bottom of the pyramid - the most prestigious and the most unprestigious types of activity.
The course of economic policy proclaimed in Russia at the end of 1991, called “shock therapy” and continued in the “voucher” privatization and conversion of the military-industrial complex, led the country to a deep crisis, which is now systemic nature, those. covers all aspects of social life. As a result, the structure of industry changed for the worse. The industries that suffered the most were those that were part of the military-industrial complex, where the production of high-tech products was concentrated, as well as civil engineering, which produced, in particular, machine tools, turbines, etc. Mining and mineral extraction have become predominant primary processing(in metallurgy and chemistry). The light and textile industries are in complete decline due to the displacement of their products by imported goods. Along with the decline in agricultural production and the replacement of domestic products with imports, a number of branches of the food industry are being curtailed 416.
Huge masses of employed people, mainly medium- and highly qualified specialists, were released from the crisis industries. Some of them emigrated abroad, some went into private business, opened their own small businesses, some went into shuttle trade, and many found themselves unemployed. Over 10 years, the number of people employed in science and scientific services has decreased from 3.4 to 1.5 million people; the majority moved to other industries, up to 1/10 went abroad 417.
Production and research teams are weakening, disintegrating, and many simply disappear. Due to the lack of funds to purchase new equipment and repair old equipment, purchase fertilizers, etc. The number of machine operators in rural areas is decreasing. The reduction in investment in the economy has led to physical and moral aging of equipment in all sectors of the national economy. The gap between Russia and developed countries in terms of the technical level of production has increased. The normal process of reproduction of the corresponding social groups has been disrupted, since young people do not strive to enter the sphere of industry and agriculture.
Thus, structural adjustment in Russia in the late 90s led to horizontal and downward vertical mobility.
In fact, until the 60s, no research on social mobility was conducted in the USSR, and the concept itself seemed quite dubious due to its “bourgeois” origin. It took extraordinary scientific courage to make this problem an object scientific analysis 418. Instead of the term “social mobility”, others were used, namely “social mobility”, “social movement”, “social movements”. According to M.I. Rutkevich and F.R. Filippova, “social movements” is a broader concept than “social mobility”, since it characterizes not only variability, but also stability of development 419. In their book “Social Displacements,” these sociologists identified the specifics of social mobility in industrial and urban areas of the USSR, between and within generations.
The all-Union study “Indicators of Social Development of Soviet Society”, carried out by the Institute of Sociological Research of the USSR Academy of Sciences (headed by G.V. Osipov), which covered workers and engineering and production intelligentsia in the main sectors of the national economy of nine regions, recorded contradictions in the development of Soviet society and its social structures. Until the beginning of the 80s, there was a fairly high dynamics of social and structural changes, but since the late 70s, society has lost its dynamism, begins to stagnate, and reproductive processes prevail. At the same time, reproduction itself is deformed - the number of bureaucracy and “non-labor elements” is growing, figures in the shadow economy are turning into a latent structure factor, highly qualified workers and specialists often perform work below the level of their education and qualifications. These “scissors” on average across the country ranged from 10 to 50% for various social strata 420.
A large-scale study of social mobility by the Institute of Social Sciences of the USSR Academy of Sciences (1984-1988) was carried out in 12 republics and regions together with the department of social statistics of the Central Statistical Office of the USSR and many regional centers. Comparison of data on the working careers of people who entered working life from the early 40s to the early 80s allowed us to see trends in social mobility in a new way 421 . It turned out that a working career in the 50s began at 18 years old, in the 70s - at 20 years old. Women, as a rule, started working later than men (which is explained by the birth and raising of children). The most attractive group for young people was the intelligentsia. A survey of people and an analysis of work records showed that 90% of all movements occur in the first decade of work, 9% in the second, 1% in the third. On initial period account for up to 95% of the so-called return movements, when people return to the position they left. These data only confirmed what everyone knows at the level of common sense: young people are looking for themselves, trying different professions, leaving and returning.
Interesting data was obtained on the demographic composition of those moving. In general, women turned out to be more mobile than men, and young people were more mobile than older people. But men were more likely to jump through several steps in their careers than women, who moved gradually. Men were promoted from low-skilled workers to highly skilled workers and specialists several times more often than women, and women often moved from highly skilled workers to specialists.
The transition from peasants and workers to intelligentsia is called vertical interclass mobility. In the 40s and 50s she was especially active. The place of the old intelligentsia was taken by people from workers and peasants. A new social group was formed - the “people's intelligentsia”. The Bolshevik Party nominated ordinary people, the so-called “red directors”, “promotes”, to leadership positions in industry, agriculture, and government bodies. The upper class, if by that we mean the party nomenklatura, which made up no more than 1.5% of the total population, continued to be replenished at the expense of the lower classes even later. For example, as part of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee (the highest layer of the ruling class) 1965-1984. people from the peasantry accounted for about 65%, from workers - 17, and from the intelligentsia - 18% 422.
However, the infiltration of representatives of the lower classes into the upper class took place on a limited scale. In general, in the 60-80s, interclass mobility slowed down, and mass transitions essentially ceased. A period of stabilization has begun.
When the workers, peasantry and intelligentsia are replenished mainly by people from their own class, they speak of self-reproduction of the class, or reproducing it on its own basis. According to large-scale studies (covering a country, entire regions or cities) conducted in different years F.R. Filippov, M.Kh. Titmoy, L.A. Gordon, V.N. Shubkin, 2/3 of the intelligentsia were replenished by people from this group. This share is even higher among workers and peasants. Children of workers and peasants more often move into the category of intellectuals than children of intellectuals become peasants and workers. This phenomenon is also called self-recruitment.
Intraclass mobility came to the fore, accounting for up to 80% of all movements in the 70s and 80s. Intraclass mobility is sometimes called the transition from simple to complex labor: the worker remains a worker, but his qualifications are constantly growing.
A study conducted by the Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences on the basis of a territorial all-Russian sample of about 2000 people made it possible to determine the main trajectories of group and individual mobility in Russian society in 1986-1993. 423 Data showed that the majority of Russian citizens retained their socio-professional status. Most managers remained in their places. The number of certified specialists has decreased insignificantly. The share of the unemployed population has increased. In addition to those who became pensioners, the number of unemployed also included the unemployed. Some positions overlap: for example, a certified specialist can remain one by moving to a group of entrepreneurs or the unemployed. Managers continued to replenish their ranks with certified specialists. This transition is traditional for Soviet system.
In the “pre-perestroika” years, the management corps included a particularly large number of educated and qualified people, usually technical specialists. Over the past eight years, the tech group has become increasingly self-perpetuating. Only students actively replenished its composition, although some of them also came from working class backgrounds. Here we must take into account the tradition of the Soviet education system, which gives some advantages to workers when allocating places in universities, especially in evening and correspondence courses.
In the USSR, the share of workers in the employed population was constantly increasing. However, under the conditions of modernization, the number of jobs requiring manual labor, and at the same time the share of unskilled sections of the working class, usually decreases. Data show that the share of workers in modern Russia is declining, but at an extremely low rate 424 . One of the most immobile groups, as before, remains the peasantry. The transition from peasants to workers continues, although not as intensively. The social stratum of the unemployed is the most mobile 425.
The most complete description vertical mobility channels was given by P. Sorokin, who called them “vertical circulation channels.” According to Sorokin, since vertical mobility to one degree or another exists in any society, even in primitive ones, there are no impassable boundaries between strata. Between them there are various “holes”, “plays”, “membranes” through which individuals move up and down.
Sorokin received special attention social institutions - army, church, school, family, property, which are used as social circulation channels.
Army functions in this capacity not in peacetime, but in wartime. Large losses among the command staff lead to filling vacancies from lower ranks. During war, soldiers advance through talent and courage. Once promoted, they use the resulting power as a channel for further advancement and accumulation of wealth. They have the opportunity to rob, pillage, seize trophies, take indemnities, take away slaves, surround themselves with pompous ceremonies and titles, and transfer their power by inheritance.
It is known that out of 92 Roman emperors, 36 achieved this, starting from the lower ranks. Of the 65 Byzantine emperors, 12 were promoted through military careers. Napoleon and his entourage, marshals, generals and the kings of Europe appointed by him came from commoners. Cromwell, Grant, Washington and thousands of other commanders rose to the highest positions through the army.
In Soviet society, work in the police over the past decades has represented one of the permanent channels of social mobility, in particular movement from village to city, and this happened largely due to the shortage of city residents willing to serve in the police. Those who had served were accepted into the Moscow police. In the army there are young people under the age of 35 and without Moscow registration. There might not have been any other way to get to the capital as soon as they got a job in the police, say, for people from the Russian hinterland. Not only the army and the police, but also the security forces as a whole previously and now act as a powerful channel of vertical mobility, allowing people to ascend from the peripheral to the central segments of society.
Church as a channel of social circulation, it moved a large number of people from the bottom to the top of society. Gebbon, Archbishop of Reims, was a former slave. Pope Gregory VII is the son of a carpenter. P. Sorokin studied the biographies of 144 Roman Catholic popes and found that 28 of them came from the lower strata, and 27 from the middle strata. The institution of celibacy (celibacy), introduced in the 11th century. Pope Gregory VII, obliged the Catholic clergy not to have children. Thanks to this, after the death of officials, the vacated positions were filled with new people.
The church was a channel not only of upward, but also of downward movement. Thousands of heretics, pagans, enemies of the church were put on trial, ruined and destroyed. Among them were many kings, dukes, princes, lords, aristocrats and nobles of high rank.
School. Institutions of upbringing and education, no matter what specific form they take, have served in all centuries as a powerful channel of social circulation. The USA and the USSR are societies where schools are available to all its members. In such a society, the “social elevator” moves from the very bottom, passes through all floors and reaches the very top.
The USA and the USSR are the most striking examples of how it is possible to achieve impressive success, becoming great industrial powers of the world, adhering to opposing political and ideological values, but equally providing their citizens with equal educational opportunities.
Britain represents the other pole, where privileged schools are available only to the upper classes. The “social elevator” is short: it moves only on the upper floors of a social building.
An example of a “long elevator” is Ancient China. During the era of Confucius, schools were open to all grades. Exams were held every three years. The best students, regardless of the status of their families, were selected and transferred to higher schools and then to universities, from where they were promoted to high government positions. Under the influence of Confucius, the government of the mandarins was reputed to be the government of Chinese intellectuals, exalted thanks to the school “mechanism”. The educational test served as universal suffrage.
Thus, the Chinese school constantly elevated the common people and prevented the advancement of the upper classes if they did not meet the requirements. As a result, official duties were performed with dignity, and positions were filled based on personal talents.
High competition for admission to colleges and universities in many countries is explained by the fact that education is the fastest and most accessible channel of upward mobility.
Own most clearly manifested in the form of accumulated wealth and money. They are one of the simplest and most effective ways of social promotion. In the XV-XVIII centuries. European society began to be ruled by money. Only those who had money, not noble birth, achieved high positions. The last periods of the history of Ancient Greece and Rome were the same.
According to P. Sorokin, not all, but only some occupations and professions contribute to the accumulation of wealth. According to his calculations, this allows the occupation of a manufacturer (29%), a banker and stockbroker (21%), and a merchant (12%). The professions of artists, painters, inventors, statesmen, miners and some others do not provide such opportunities.
Family and marriage become channels of vertical circulation if representatives of different social strata enter into an alliance. In European society, the marriage of a poor but titled partner with a rich but not noble one was common. As a result, both moved up the social ladder, receiving what they lacked. Examples of downward mobility can be found in ancient times. According to Roman law, a free woman who married a slave became a slave herself and lost her status as a free citizen.
Even primitive societies were interested in being ruled by the most gifted. But how to discover innate talents if there are no special methods and techniques? The ancients found a very simple way. Through empirical observation, they found that smart parents are more likely to have smart children, and vice versa. The thesis about the inheritance of the qualities of parents was firmly established in the minds of our ancestors. It is this that underlies the ban on inter-caste marriages. The lower the social position, the fewer virtues parents have and their children inherit. And vice versa. So it gradually arose institution of inheritance of social status parents by children: born into a family of high social rank also deserves a high rank.
The family has become the main mechanism of social selection, determination and inheritance of social status. Coming from a noble family does not automatically guarantee good heredity and a decent education. Parents cared about the best upbringing of their children; this became a mandatory norm for the aristocracy. In poor families, parents could not provide adequate education and upbringing. Any society needs guarantees. They could be given by noble families. The managerial elite was recruited from them. The family has become one of the institutions for distributing members of society into strata.
Ancient societies were deeply concerned about the stability of the family, because it was at the same time a school, a center for vocational training, an industrial association, and much more. When the family began to lose its former halo of sanctity, marriages began to easily break up, and divorces became an everyday event, society had to take on all these functions. Schools emerged outside the family, production outside the family, services outside the family.
Children remain in the family only while they are minors. In fact, they grow up outside the family. The meaning of purity of blood and inherited qualities has been lost. People are increasingly being judged not by their family background, but by their personal qualities.
The most important characteristic of Soviet society was strict control over channels of vertical mobility. The capacity of the canals, wide in the period from the 20s to the 50s, began to narrow in the 60s and turned into a narrow passage in the “stagnant” period of the 70s-80s (Figure 11.1).
While allowing some freedom of movement in the early stages of a career, the control system became stricter the closer the advancer was to high-status positions. The Soviet-style mobility system was not built on the principles of competitive selection, but as a result of the spontaneous laws of the market; it minimized the role of chance, elements, luck and initiative. Promotion was determined by the decision of higher authorities. In Soviet times, as under Peter I, naturally, not everyone was allowed to govern the state, but only a select few. But they were chosen not on the basis of noble titles and pedigree, but on political and ideological grounds. In order to occupy leadership positions in the Soviet state, one had to be a member of the Communist Party, have an unblemished reputation, conduct active social work, and observe the principles of party morality.
Scheme 11.1. Channel capacity
vertical mobility - nomenklatura career -
in Soviet society decreased over the years
To government positions both under Peter 1 and under I.V. Stalin was appointed from above - for special services to the state. Gradually, a special job stratum was formed - nomenclature, those. the highest layer of party functionaries.
Stalin's purges of the party nomenklatura led to a reshuffling of elite groups and represented a trigger for social mobility. Its inventor was, of course, not Stalin, but Ivan the Terrible, whose oprichnina was a very effective mechanism of this kind. If such a mechanism is launched quite periodically, it entails the release and, accordingly, the replacement of many vacancies.
But as soon as repression began to fade into the past and the Stalin era was replaced by the Khrushchev thaw, and then the Brezhnev stagnation, this immediately led to a sharp slowdown in upward mobility. In the course of their research (1993), L. B. Kosova and T. Clark conducted about two thousand interviews with figures in government, science and culture of the USSR who held nomenklatura positions, and with representatives of the new Russian elite 426. Analysis of the data obtained showed that over the 30 years of post-Stalinism, the duration of the path to a nomenklatura career, the only way to achieve high status, increased threefold.
By the mid-70s, vertical mobility had finally acquired the character of slow advancement along a strictly calibrated career ladder. There was only one way to the top, which could only be reached through the position of a mid-level manager: deputy director, chief engineer, head of a department of a large enterprise, an employee of a party or public organization in a low position 427. At the same time, the rate of rise gradually slowed down, and society became more and more closed.
As for career careers, 90% of those surveyed in the elite groups began their careers from very modest positions: 41% as specialists who had no subordinates, 12 as technical workers, 31 as blue-collar workers, 4 as service sector employees, 2% as agricultural workers. farms. On average, the path to the top - to the first nomenklatura or equivalent position - required about 17 years, but for different elite groups this figure was not the same. Thus, the fastest careers were made by representatives of the party elite, workers of mass organizations. They received their first nomenklatura position after an average of 12-13 years. Representatives of the scientific-cultural and old economic elite have the slowest careers - 19-20 years. In different historical periods, the rate of vertical mobility varied quite greatly: before 1953 it reached 8 years, in 1954-1961. - 9, in 1962-1968 - 11, in 1969-1973 - 14, in 1974-1984 - 18, in 1985-1988 - 23, in 1989-1991 - 22 years.
Almost no one occupied an elite position directly from the starting position - there was a certain “waiting room” (or checkpoint) through which one had to pass in order to be admitted to high-status positions. This is the position of a mid-level manager, deputy director, chief engineer, party organization employee. The chances of getting into the elite straight from the workers were practically zero. Growth occurred through higher education, joining the party, and promotion 428.
The erection of social barriers and partitions, restricting access to another group or closing the group into itself is called social clause(social closure). This term refers to both the process and the result of the process. This phenomenon was described by M. Weber 429.
By social clause, or social closure of a group, M. Weber understood the restriction of access to its ranks by a privileged group and thereby increasing its life chances. The mechanism of closure is becoming a standard, and then a criterion for selecting those rare qualities (for example, talent, competence, nobility, worthy birth) that members of a given group possess and that others do not possess. A status group professing such principles may, over time, degenerate into a clique. Weber pointed out that any trait, even an invented one, can be used as a selection criterion, a basis for identifying oneself with a group or screening out outsiders from one’s ranks.
Closed groups are the lot of all stratified societies, based not only on income inequality, but also on inequality of access to privileged groups. Merchants and artisans, who at first represented open groups, over time, became as closed and replenished only through inheritance as slave owners or feudal lords.
In the case where the transition between groups - from artisans to merchants, from hired workers to employers - does not encounter legal obstacles, the urban population, which includes these groups, should be considered a single stratum. But in the case where there were any obstacles to such a transition (say, the legal boundaries of the groups were clearly fixed, and the transition was formalized with special documents or special permission from the authorities), these groups should be considered different classes.
Social closure, or closure, is the actions of a status group aimed at protecting and guaranteeing certain resources and advantages at the expense of other groups. Where many closed groups appear, where the process is underway restrictions on access to status group, the number of strata and substrate are growing there. An example is the caste system, numbering thousands of closed strata and substratum.
The most striking form of social closure is the inheritance of property and the principle of lineage. They were widely used in traditional societies primarily by dominant groups. As we move from traditional to modern society, the criteria for closure change. The place of noble birth is taken by competitive examinations, which are open to all. Nevertheless, even today the education system, according to Weber, retains the function of a selective tool, with the help of which newcomers are selected and entry into highly prestigious groups is controlled. An educational diploma is now no less effective than race, religion, or family background. Representatives of liberal professions limit access to their ranks not only by a certificate or license issued by the state, but also by the need to gain recognition in their circle, personal acquaintances in it, recommendations of its members, etc.
As a striking example of a status group, Weber cites bureaucracy, which, like any other group, fights to preserve intra-group values, goals and interests, shows solidarity with its own kind, etc. Unlike the party, it does not fight for power and to establish its dominance in a revolutionary or legitimate way, based on elections. The bureaucracy is located throughout the management pyramid and invisibly controls the distribution of resources. She has the power necessary to preserve her life functions by virtue of her official position. The specific ethos of bureaucracy lies in the cultivation of secrecy and professionalism. It is not an executive committee of another class, but rather an organized status group 430 . In a technical sense, the bureaucracy is not a class and cannot participate on equal terms with it in the struggle for power. Bureaucracy is the most powerful and influential of all status groups. She controls the career career of others, the distribution of society's resources, without having the privileges of the owner and the advantages of market monopolists.
The social organism gradually becomes more and more immobile and closed to movement. Higher positions, which were elective in the early stages, become hereditary in later stages. This trend can be traced through history. IN Ancient Egypt Only in the later stages did a strict custom of inheritance of official posts emerge. In Sparta, at the earliest stages, foreigners were admitted to the rank of full-blooded citizens; later this became an exception. In 451 BC. e. Pericles introduced a law according to which the privilege of free citizenship was granted only to those whose both parents were natives of Attica and free (full) citizens.
In Venice in 1296 the layer of aristocracy was open, and since 1775, having lost its former significance, it becomes closed. In the Roman Empire, before its collapse, all social strata and groups became closed. A place among the court nobility in early feudal Europe was available to any nobleman, but subsequently this layer becomes impenetrable to new people. The tendency towards caste isolation began to manifest itself among the bourgeoisie in England after the 15th century, and in France after the 12th century.
Modern Western societies are characterized by sociologists as both open and closed social structures. For example, B. Schaefer, who compared the scale of social mobility in Germany in the 30s and in the 70s, noted, along with the fact of high vertical mobility, also an amazing constancy, similarity social structure societies in different historical eras 431. In the USA and Japan, only 7-10% of workers rise to the upper class. The children of businessmen, politicians, and lawyers have 5-8 times more opportunities to follow in the footsteps of their fathers than would happen if society were completely open. The higher the social class, the more difficult it is to penetrate. The rich send their children to privileged schools and universities, which are expensive but provide an excellent education. A good education is a necessary condition in order to have a prestigious profession and obtain the position of diplomat, minister, banker, professor. It is the upper class that passes laws that are beneficial to itself and disadvantageous to others. According to L. Duberman's research, for a whole century the American class structure remained relatively unchanged 432. Empirical studies of the process of class formation in England also indicate the immobility of the hierarchical structure and its closedness 433.
Social mobility of the population, calculated within the life of one or two generations, confirms the rigid immutability of the social structure in France, where there is a predominance of inheritance of professions from generation to generation. In France, in the period 1945 to 1975, at each level of the social structure there was a tendency towards stability rather than change: the top and bottom layers of the hierarchy remained isolated 434 . These conclusions are confirmed by studies of social biographies of D. Berto, who showed that only a small part of employees increases their social status, and 41% of the children of employees become workers 435.
Thus, the tendency towards social closure is inherent in all societies. It characterizes the stabilization of social life, the transition from the early to the mature stage of development, as well as the increasing role of the ascribed status and the decreasing role of the achieved.
In a young, rapidly developing society, vertical mobility manifests itself very intensively. Russia during the era of Peter I, Soviet Russia in the 20-30s, Russia during the era of perestroika (90s of the 20th century) are examples of such a society. People from the middle and even lower classes, thanks to fortunate circumstances, ability or resourcefulness, quickly move up. There are many available vacancies here. But when all the seats are filled, the upward movement slows down. The new upper class is protected from the entry of late seekers by many social barriers. The social group has closed.
According to Western sociologists, only during the period of industrialization did the USSR have an open society, which is explained by the acute shortage of managerial personnel. Then in the USSR all people, of course, with the exception of class enemies, had an equal starting position and equal chances for social ascent. A system of mass training of specialists was created in the country. Later, the needs for personnel were met - even with some reserve: people with higher education began to occupy jobs. Thus, there appeared workers-intellectuals. Soviet social scientists considered this to be another achievement of socialism. But in the “stagnant” period, i.e. in the 70-80s, begins self-recruitment social layers. Society stabilized and vertical mobility decreased. Social strata began to reproduce primarily at their own expense: the children of workers became workers, the children of office workers became employees. Sociological studies of this period revealed a clear tendency to obtain higher education among children whose parents also had a high level of education. This trend was significantly lower in other populations 436 . The results of sociological studies of the 70-80s indicate a high degree of closedness even in the working class. Since 1986, it has been replenished mainly by graduates of vocational schools, technical colleges and other similar educational institutions 437. The same structure of reproduction was typical for the group of service sector workers. The stagnation and stagnation that gripped society forced the country's leadership to begin perestroika, which turned into capitalization.
In stable capitalist societies (USA, England, France, Germany, etc.), the upper class has long become hereditary. The accumulation of wealth began within kinship clans created by mutual marriages several centuries ago. In the USA, the upper class has maintained continuity in time since the 18th century. and goes back to immigrants from Northern Ireland. Socialization of children in closed schools, and then practices in the parent fields of activity, corporations and companies separate the upper class from the rest of society.
What population groups made up the new upper class in Russia? The main core is represented by those who belonged to it and Soviet power, namely nomenclature (70%); those businessmen who were engaged in underground business under Soviet rule and in the new conditions were able to legalize the fortune they had made, i.e. criminal elements (15%); clever people, representatives of different groups - from a research institute employee to a university teacher, who turned out to be useful either to the nomenklatura or to the criminals (15%). In general, the upper class was completed by 1994, all public property was mainly divided between powerful factions and clans.
A specific feature of the new upper class in Russia was its very fast folding and just as fast - in a much shorter time than in Western countries ah, – its closing.
The social closure of the upper class in Russia began to be observed already in 1994. Before that, i.e. Between 1989 and 1993, opportunities for upward mobility for all Russians were at least formally open, albeit unequal.
It is known that the capacity of the upper class is objectively limited and amounts to no more than 3–5% of the population. In 1989 – 1992 large capitals were easily amassed. Today, to gain access to the elite, you need capital and opportunities that most people do not have.
At the same time, access to the rural and urban middle class is open. The stratum of farmers is extremely small and does not exceed 1%. The middle urban strata have not yet been formed. But their replenishment depends on how soon the new Russians and the country's leadership will pay for qualified mental work not at the subsistence level, but at its market price.
In modern Russian society, the upper class has the second feature - demonstrative luxury, but does not have the first - heredity. But it is also beginning to actively take shape thanks to the closure of the higher stratum.
According to M. F. Chernysh, the process of modernization of modern Russian society is not accompanied by an increase in social mobility. The “closedness” of the main social groups continues to grow regardless of reforms in the economy. In other words, no matter how serious the current changes are, they have not affected the foundations of the social structure of Russian society 438 .
The modernization of Russian society comes down primarily to the redistribution of material and social resources. The current attempt at modernization is similar to what happened in Russia after October 1917. At that time, the “locomotive” of the transition to “modernity” was considered a radical restructuring of social relations. It seems that current reformers believe that the main task is to create, at any cost, an entrepreneurial class that will take control of the country's economic resources and lead it out of the crisis. But the experience of other countries shows that the entrepreneurial class that arose outside
production activity, is not able to fulfill this role 439.
Russia has experienced at least two major waves of marginalization. The first came after the revolution of 1917. Two classes were forcibly knocked out of the social structure - the nobility and the bourgeoisie, which were part of the elite of society. A new proletarian elite began to form from the lower classes. Workers and peasants became “red directors” and ministers overnight. Bypassing the usual trajectory of social ascent for a stable society - through the middle class - they skipped one step and got to where they could not get before and would not get to in the future (Diagram 11.2).
Scheme 11.2. The first wave of marginalization. After the revolution of 1917 in
the social structure of Russian society has undergone serious
transformation. The nobility and bourgeoisie, who made up the highest
class (elite). The vacated place was taken by representatives of the lower
classes who immediately found themselves in a marginal situation.
Essentially, representatives of the Soviet elite turned out to be what can be called rising marginals. They broke away from one class, but did not become full-fledged, as is required in a civilized society, representatives of a new, higher class. They retained the same behavior, values, language, and cultural customs characteristic of the lower classes of society, although they sincerely tried to join the artistic values of high culture, learned to read and write, went on cultural trips, visited theaters and propaganda studios.
This path from bottom to top persisted until the beginning of the 70s, when domestic sociologists first established that all classes and strata of Soviet society are now being reproduced on their own basis, i.e. only at the expense of representatives of their class. This lasted only two decades, which can be considered a period of stabilization of Soviet society and the absence of mass marginalization.
The second wave occurred in the early 90s and also as a result of qualitative changes in the social structure of Russian society (Diagram 11.3).
The return movement of society from socialism to capitalism led to radical changes in the social structure. The elite of society was formed from three additions: criminals, nomenklatura and commoners. A certain part of the elite was replenished from representatives of the lower class - shaven-headed minions of Russian mafiosi, numerous racketeers and organized criminals - often were former members of the petty forces and dropouts. The era of primitive accumulation - the early phase of capitalism - brought to life ferment in all layers of society. The path to enrichment during this period, as a rule, lies outside the legal space. Among the first, those who did not have a high education or high morality, but who fully personified “wild capitalism,” began to get rich.
In addition to representatives of the lower classes, the elite included commoners, i.e. people from different groups of the Soviet middle class and intelligentsia, as well as the nomenklatura, which at the right time found itself in in the right place, namely at the levers of power, when public property had to be divided. On the contrary, the predominant part of the middle class has undergone downward mobility and joined the ranks of the poor. Unlike the old poor (declassed elements: chronic alcoholics, beggars, homeless people, drug addicts, prostitutes) existing in any society, this part is called the “new poor”. They represent a specific feature of Russia. This category of poor does not exist either in Brazil, or in the USA, or in any country in the world. The first distinguishing feature is a high level of education. Teachers, lecturers, engineers, doctors and other categories of public sector employees were among the poor only by economic criterion - income. But they are not such girlfriends based on more important criteria related to education, culture and standard of living. Unlike the old chronic poor, the “new poor” are a temporary category. When the economic situation in the country changes, better side they are ready to return to
Scheme 11.3. Second wave of marginalization. As a result of the transition
Russian society in the 90s from socialism to capitalism in
The social structure has undergone major transformations. Part
The new Russians (elite) included representatives from the lower strata. Average
the class polarized, splitting into two streams: part (nomenclature and
commoners) joined the elite, and the other part (“new poor”)
joined the ranks of the poor.
middle class. And they try to give their children a higher education, to instill the values of the elite of society, and not the “social bottom”.
Thus, radical changes in the social structure of Russian society in the 90s are associated with the polarization of the middle class, its stratification into two poles, which replenished the upper and lower classes of society. As a result, the number of this class has decreased significantly.
Having found themselves in the stratum of the “new poor,” the Russian intelligentsia found itself in a marginal situation: it did not want and could not give up old cultural values and habits, and did not want to accept new ones. Thus, in terms of their economic status, these layers belong to the lower class, and in terms of their lifestyle and culture, they belong to the middle class. In the same way, representatives of the lower class who joined the ranks of the “new Russians” found themselves in a marginal situation. They are characterized by the old “rags to riches” model: the inability to behave and speak decently, to communicate in the way required by the new economic status. On the contrary, the downward model characterizing the movement of state employees could be called “from riches to rags.”
Some experts believe that marginality is a one-generation phenomenon, a temporary phantom. Those who came from rural areas to cities are marginal, but their children only partially inherit, by inertia, certain elements of the marginal subculture. And already in the second or third generations this problem disappears, and thus marginality is overcome 440.
R. Dahrendorf believed that the higher the standard of living of the population, the more the population tends to assimilate the bourgeois values of Western civilization and to a lesser extent the values of socialism. The process of bourgeoisification is inherent in a society emerging from the socialist phase of development, and it is associated with the gradual acquisition of individualistic values and proprietary orientations.
To demographic factors include: fertility and mortality of the population, its migration, marriage rate, divorce rate, fragmentation and consolidation of families. Demographic processes transform the structure of the population into a new state: new proportions emerge between different categories of the population, their distribution across the territory, the degree of their homogeneity, and typical average parameters change.
The influence of demographic factors in statistics is determined from a calculation in which the total population growth (GP) (of the entire population or its individual categories) is divided into natural (NA) and migration (MP). Indicators can be presented in absolute terms and per 1000 population. In table 11.2 shows the results of such calculations for Russia in dynamics (ATP - administrative-territorial transformation).
Table data 11.2 indicate a stable long-term trend in the movement of the rural population to cities, this is indicated by the negative balance of migration of the rural population. In addition, there was a migration outflow to other republics. The most dramatic changes in indicators occurred by 1993. In the 90s, due to changes in the socio-economic and political situation in the country, new trends arose. They are caused primarily by significant migration flows from the former Soviet republics to Russia. All the previous proportions have shifted: the ratio of natural and migration growth, the ratio of indicators for the urban and rural population. The economic crisis, which affected different regions with varying severity, the aggravation of interethnic relations and the emergence of hotbeds of hostilities, dramatically changed the demographic situation in the country and in individual territories, which led to shifts in the composition of the population 441.
Table 11.2
Components of resident population dynamics Russian Federation(on 1000 average annual population)
|
Years |
Whole population |
Urban population |
Rural population |
||||||||
Sources: Population of Russia. Annual demographic report. M.: Eurasia, 1993. P. 73; Demographic Yearbook of the Russian Federation. 1993. M.: Goskomstat of Russia. 1993: pp. 10-12.
Vertical and horizontal mobility are influenced by gender, age, birth rate, death rate, and population density. In general, young people and men are more mobile than older people and women. Overpopulated countries are more likely to experience the effects of emigration than immigration. Where the birth rate is high, the population is younger and therefore more mobile, and vice versa.
Young people are characterized by professional mobility, adults by economic mobility, and older people by political mobility. Fertility rates are not equally distributed across classes. The lower classes tend to have more children, and the upper classes fewer. There is a pattern: the higher a person climbs the social ladder, the fewer children he has.
Even if every son of a rich man follows in his father's footsteps, there will still be voids at the top of the social pyramid that are filled by people from the lower classes. In no class do people plan the exact number of children needed to replace parents. The number of vacancies and the number of applicants for occupying certain social positions in different classes is different.
Professionals (doctors, lawyers, etc.) and skilled employees do not have enough children to fill their jobs in the next generation. In contrast, farmers and agricultural workers in, say, the US have 50% more children than they need to replace themselves. It is not difficult to calculate in which direction social mobility should occur in modern society.
High and low fertility in different classes has the same effect on vertical mobility as population density in different countries has on horizontal mobility. Strata, like countries, can be overpopulated or underpopulated.
Migration is a type of horizontal mobility.Population migration- these are movements of people associated, as a rule, with a change of place of residence (relocation of people from country to country, from region to region, from city to village and back, from city to city, from village to village). It is divided into irrevocable (with a final change of permanent residence), temporary (relocation for a fairly long, but limited period), seasonal (movement during certain periods of the year), depending on the time of year (tourism, treatment, study, agricultural work), pendulum - regular movements of a given point and return to it (Table 11.3).
Table 11.3
Some forecast estimates of annual net migration volumes
to Russia (average option; thousand people)
|
A year once works |
Forecast year |
|||
|
Goskomstat of the Russian Federation | ||||
|
Center for Economic Conditions under the Government of the Russian Federation | ||||
|
Center for Economic Conditions * | ||||
|
Center for Demography and Human Ecology Institute of National Economic LV forecasting (TSCECH) | ||||
*Single-variant assessment.
Source: Iontsev V.A. International migration of the population: Russia and the modern world // Sociological studies. 1998. No. 6. P. 46.
Migration is a very broad concept that covers all types of migration processes, i.e. population movements both within one country and between countries - around the world (international migration). Migration can be external (outside the country) and internal. External ones include emigration, immigration, and internal ones include movement from village to city, inter-district relocations, etc.
Migration does not always take mass forms. In quiet times it affects small groups or individuals. Their movement usually occurs spontaneously. Demographers identify two main migration flows within one country: urban-rural and urban-urban. It has been established that as long as industrialization continues in the country, people move mainly from villages to cities. Upon its completion, and this is typical for the United States and Western Europe, people move from the city to suburban areas and rural areas.
An interesting pattern is emerging: flows of migrants are directed to those places where social mobility is highest. And one more thing: those who move from city to city arrange their lives more easily and achieve greater success than those who move from village to city and vice versa.
Sociologists identify several historical types of migration, which are distinguished by special sociological characteristics 442.
The first and oldest form of movement of entire peoples is considered conquests. They played a huge role in the history of mankind, its settlement throughout the globe, and in the formation of races and ethnic groups. The largest of them were the resettlement of Semitic peoples in Mesopotamia (3rd millennium BC), the resettlement of Aryan tribes from the southern steppes. Siberia (approximately 4th millennium BC), the resettlement of the Celts to Europe (1st millennium BC), etc. Further, we can note the sea migrations of the Normans (VIII-XI centuries), the migration of the Bulgarians and the Magyars, the widespread migration of Arabs (VII-VIII centuries), and later the Mongols (XIII century). According to the passionary theory of L.N. Gumilyov, the impetus for each such migration was given by a “passionary” impetus (biological-cosmic origin). These powerful processes were accompanied by active assimilation and led to the emergence of new ethnic groups, the birth and death of empires.
The Great Migration of Peoples in the IV-VII centuries was of particular importance. n. e., which crushed the Roman Empire. This was undoubtedly the largest migration process. This is both an ethnic and an economic process.
Great Migration- the name of the era of mass migrations of Hunnic, Germanic, Slavic and other tribes in the IV-VII centuries. They are also called barbarian tribes who lived during the period of decomposition of the primitive communal system on the outskirts of the Roman Empire. It is difficult to determine the number of peoples who participated in the migrations due to a lack of sources. According to some sources, the Visigoths numbered about 15 thousand people; vandals - from 200 to 400 thousand; Slavs - up to 100 thousand people. The result of the great migration was the death of the slave-owning Roman Empire, the formation of early feudal (barbarian) states and nationalities, the ancestors of modern European peoples.
The second type of horizontal mobility is urbanization - regular movement of population from villages to cities and (more rarely) in the opposite direction. The intensity of these movements depends on the specific conditions of the country and era. If at the beginning of the 19th century. In the cities of the world there lived about 30 million people (3%) of the population, then by the beginning of the 20th century. - 224 million (13.6%), and by the end - more than 2 billion (over 40%). In Russia, the urban population is more than 66% 443.
The third type of migration is colonization. Colonization- development of empty and sparsely populated territories. First great colonization They consider the ancient Greek, the second - Roman, the third - European, which began with the great geographical discoveries of the 15th-17th centuries. and the result of which was the emergence of gigantic colonial empires. Colonization has always been one of the ways to resolve internal conflicts in metropolitan countries through the migration of “surplus” or dissatisfied with their situation population. This migration could be forced (when criminals or political offenders were expelled) or voluntary. People left countries to escape chronic social disasters and hope to start a new life in a new place. These were mostly able-bodied and energetic people, and their mass outflow had catastrophic consequences for some European countries. Back in the 17th century. Sancho de Moncada published the book “The Poverty of Spain - the Result of the Discovery of America,” in which he argued that the decline of the country, despite the influx of American gold and silver (Spain monopolized 83% of the world’s production of precious metals), was associated with the outflow of a significant part of the Spanish population overseas. Spain itself turned out to be overcrowded with lazy vagabonds, thieves, beggars and beggar monks.
By the beginning of the 20th century. Italy was in first place in terms of the number of emigrants (up to 700-800 thousand people left it annually). Ireland held the record for the number of emigrants in the 2nd half of the 19th century. its population decreased by half (about 5 million people left the country from 1846 to 1891). In total, since the beginning of the 19th century. Before 1914, about 50 million people left Europe, emigrating mainly to the USA, Canada, Australia - states generally created by emigrants. From 1918 to 1961, the next flow of immigrants from Europe (mainly to the USA) amounted to 16 million people 444.
Emigration processes continue in our time. For example, in 1981, 233 thousand people left the UK (this is a kind of post-colonial emigration record). But at the same time, the opposite process is also observed: an influx of “colored” emigrants to England, mainly from former British colonies. By 1981, their number reached 2 million people, i.e. accounted for 4% of the total population of the country. According to forecasts, by 2000
The “colored” community in Great Britain was to make up 6.7% of the population 445. Similar processes take place in almost all major industrial countries of the world (excluding Japan). For example, about 1 million emigrants arrived in the United States in 1992.
The fourth type of migration processes is Exodus, flight or exile. They are caused by extraordinary circumstances - natural disasters, political upheavals, religious persecution, wars and revolutions. Historical examples include the expulsion in the 17th century. from Spain 500 thousand Moriscos (remnants of the Arab population), the mass flight of Huguenots from France and Puritans from England in the 17th-18th centuries, the resettlement of 7 million Muslims from India to Pakistan in 1947.
As a result of the forced or voluntary exodus of large groups of the population from their historical homeland, ethnic enclaves - diasporas - are formed in the new territory. Diaspora(from the Greek Diaspora - dispersion) is a part of an ethnic group living in a new place of settlement, in different countries. This is a unique socio-ethnic community that arose as a result of complex migration processes, sometimes over the course of centuries. Originally, this term referred to Jews who had settled outside Palestine since the Babylonian captivity (6th century BC). Later, this concept spread to other ethnic and religious groups living outside their historical homeland. Nowadays there are also new diasporas, for example in the USA - Chinese, Irish, Armenian, Polish, Italian, Greek, Russian, etc.
In Russia over the past century and a half there have been several waves of emigration associated with political and religious persecution (Russia in different time revolutionaries-populists, and social democrats, and dissatisfied liberals, and socialist-revolutionaries, and anarchists, and “Old Believers”, and sectarians left 446. The most massive flow of emigrants poured out of Russia after the October Revolution and during the Civil War. A huge worldwide Russian diaspora has formed, numbering more than 2 million people 447 . In fact, a whole country arose - “foreign Russia”, very unique in its structure and way of life.
In Russia, he was one of the first to study transhistorical migration movements Andrey Alekseevich Isaev(1851-1924) - an outstanding Russian economist, statistician and sociologist. Comparing different countries Having summarized a huge amount of historical material, he discovered four main reasons that prompted people to migrate:
1) Religious - persecution by the dominant church. An example is the Old Believers (schismatics), who fled in their thousands to the remote northern regions of Russia, and the religious sect of the Mennonites left the country altogether so as not to serve military service.
2) Political - discontent public order in their homeland prompted the founding of Greek colonies along the shores of Asia Minor, on the islands of the Aegean Sea and in Italy. The troubles that occurred in England at the beginning of the 17th century contributed to the colonization of New England.
3) Criminal - the founding of colonies often occurred through the resettlement of criminals. Examples include Australia, where England deported its criminals, and Siberia, a place of exile for convicts in pre-revolutionary Russia.
4) Economic - need and greed drive hundreds of thousands of people beyond the borders of their homeland: capitalists are attracted to distant countries by the dream of receiving extremely high interest rates (in a new business, as is known, they are always higher than in an old one), and the unemployed are attracted by the hope of finding work. So the capitalists export huge amounts of money abroad, and ordinary people - workers, the ability to work 448.
Thus, migration movements of different historical eras and different countries, be it ancient Greece, modern Germany or England at the beginning of the 17th century, are explained by the same reasons.
According to A.A. Isaeva, individual people migrate in a completely different way from entire nations. Individuals part with their home voluntarily, hoping to find a more interesting job, a more satisfying life, and better living conditions in another city or country. And the people are driven by need, i.e. some objective law, say, depleted soil or countless hordes of enemies appearing from outside. This is not a voluntary, but a forced resettlement. This was the Great Migration of Peoples in the 4th-5th centuries. n. e. in Europe.
Among the types of migration important place occupy two - immigration and emigration. Emigration- travel outside the country for permanent place residence or short-term residence. Immigration– entry into this country for permanent residence or long-term residence. Thus, immigrants are moving in, and emigrants are moving out (voluntarily or involuntarily). Emigration reduces the population. If the most capable and qualified people leave, then not only the number, but also the qualitative composition of the population decreases. Immigration increases the population. The arrival of highly skilled labor in the country increases high-quality composition population, and the low-skilled population causes the opposite consequences.
Thanks to emigration and migration, new cities, countries and states emerged. It is known that in cities the birth rate is low and is constantly declining. Therefore, everything big cities, especially millionaire cities, arose due to immigration. After Columbus discovered America, thousands and millions of settlers moved here from Europe. North America, Latin America and Australia arose due to large migration processes. Siberia was developed through migration.
In total, in the 18th century. Two powerful streams of migration came from Europe - to America and to Russia. In Russia, the Volga region was especially actively populated. In 1762, the famous decree of Catherine II was published on the invitation of foreigners to civil service and settlement. Mostly Germans from Austria, Hungary, Switzerland, and Germany responded. The first stream of migrants were artisans, the second - peasants. They formed agricultural colonies in the steppe zone of Russia.
The larger the number of emigrations, the less opportunities the population has to satisfy their needs in their own country, including through internal migration. The proportions between internal and external migration are determined by the economic situation, the general social background, and the degree of tension in society. Emigration occurs where living conditions worsen and opportunities for vertical mobility are narrowed. Peasants left for Siberia and the Don, where the Cossacks formed, due to the tightening of serfdom. It was not aristocrats who left Europe, but social outsiders.
Horizontal mobility in such cases acts as a means to solve problems arising in the field of vertical mobility. The fugitive serfs who founded the Don merchants became free and prosperous, i.e. simultaneously increased their political and economic status. At the same time, their professional status could remain unchanged: peasants continued to engage in arable farming on new lands.
It is countries with pronounced immigration that determine the current migration situation in the world. These are primarily the USA, Canada, Australia, the countries of Western and Northern Europe, the Arabian monarchies in the Middle East, Venezuela, Argentina, Brazil in South America, South Africa, Zaire and Côte d'Ivoire in Africa, Singapore, Japan, Hong Kong in Asia.
Taking into account the phenomenon of the so-called near abroad, Russia can also be classified as a country of immigration, although if we focus on the far abroad, it would be more correct to talk about it as a country of emigration. It is no coincidence that according to the classification compiled in 1994 by the ILO, IOM and the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, Russia, along with a small number of other states, is characterized as both a country of emigration and immigration 449 .
Researchers identify four waves of Russian emigration:
”noble post-revolutionary;
Mixed post-war;
“Jewish-dissident” of stagnant times;
Post-Soviet “economic”.
Each of these waves had a great intellectual component, and each wave, to a certain extent, can be called a “brain drain.” In the first wave, i.e. after the October Revolution, 1.5-2 million people emigrated from Russia. Many settled in France. Representatives of other waves also emigrated here. However, according to the latest census in France, only 5 thousand people called themselves Russian.
“Economic” emigration is achievable primarily for high-class specialists and skilled workers. “Brain drain” is typical for the European part of Russia, Siberia and the Far East. The population of these regions is better prepared to adapt to the Western economy and Western lifestyle, and has higher territorial and professional mobility.
Such emigration has typical features of a “brain drain” from a poor country, which nevertheless has a relatively high cultural, scientific and technical potential. This process began in 1989, when 70 thousand scientific workers left the country. In 1990, every sixth Soviet emigrant was a scientist, engineer or doctor. In 1990, 534 people from the institutes of the USSR Academy of Sciences alone went abroad for long periods.
At the end of the 20th century. There was a significant and constant increase in the scale of migration, the involvement of almost all countries of the world in the global migration cycle, in other words, the globalization of international migration. At the beginning of 1996, there were more than 125 million migrants in the world, who essentially formed a kind of “nation of migrants” 450.
UN experts identify five categories of migrants:
1) foreigners admitted to the country of entry for education and training;
2) migrants entering for work;
3) migrants entering through family unification, creating new families;
4) migrants entering permanent settlement;
5) foreigners admitted to the country of entry for humanitarian reasons (refugees, asylum seekers, etc.) 451.
Russia's participation in global migration flows became widespread in the late 80s and 90s. Thus, short-term gross migration has increased almost threefold since 1988, while private migration (i.e., at the invitation of relatives, acquaintances, legal entities etc.) - more than 15 times 452. The change in the migration pattern in Russian society was mainly influenced by the collapse of the USSR.
Suddenly there were about 25 million Russians outside the Russian Federation, i.e. 17.4% of the total number within the former USSR. The bulk (almost 70%) is concentrated in Ukraine and Kazakhstan. The share of the Russian population in Latvia, Estonia, and Kyrgyzstan is very high. Russians who previously lived in the Baltic states, Ukraine, and Central Asia turned into foreigners and were forced to either take non-Russian citizenship or turn into refugees and move to the Russian Federation. By the time of the collapse of the USSR, in 10 of the 15 former Soviet republics, representatives of non-indigenous nationalities made up over 1/4 of the population, and in two republics - Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan - even more than half of the population. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, 6 million Ukrainians, more than 2 million Belarusians, etc. also found themselves outside their national states.
With the advent of the near abroad, a unique situation arose when, within the framework of the former USSR, internal migration immediately turned into external migration. At the same time, Russia practically remains the only one of the former Soviet republics that, neither directly nor indirectly (through laws on citizenship, land, language, etc.) has not closed its borders to all former Soviet citizens wishing to enter it, no matter what their nationality neither were they.
The territory of the USSR was home to a population of almost 300 million people, consisting of 130 ethnic groups, with one in five of its citizens living outside their national region.
According to the data International organization according to Migration (MOM), from 1990 to 1996, the population of Russia increased due to migration by 3.3 million people (for comparison: for the period 1976-1990 - by 2.4 million people). According to sociological forecasts, if the economic situation in Russia improves, the number of migrants could reach 1.2-1.5 million people per year. The main flow of immigrants from the former Soviet republics are Russians. In terms of the number of migrants in 1996, Kazakhstan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan were in the lead. Baltic countries for last years More than 10% of the Russian-speaking population left the republics of Central Asia and Transcaucasia - 17%. From 1990 to 1996, almost 2,362,000 Russians moved to Russia 453.
After the October Revolution, about 2 million people emigrated. Until the mid-80s, an average of up to 3 thousand people went abroad for permanent residence annually. In 1988, the emigration of Jews, Germans and Greeks, as well as visiting, was practically allowed. If in 1987 9.7 thousand emigrants left Russia, then over the next three years their number increased more than 10 times and reached a maximum value of 103.6 thousand in 1990. 454 Subsequently, the volume of emigration did not increase.
A distinctive feature of Russia's migration exchange is its one-sidedness: more people leave Russia than come to it. Thus, in 1992, 34 times more people left for permanent residence abroad than 455 people entered. But in 1993-1998. the situation has changed. More people came to Russia than left. Millions of Russian immigrants poured into the country from the former Soviet republics. They were called refugees.
Since 1992, population migration from neighboring countries has become not only one of the main components of the overall population growth in Russia. Essentially, it plays a crucial role in smoothing out the demographic crisis caused by natural decline, which amounted to more than 4.1 million people. The emigration outflow to non-CIS countries over the same years reached 623 thousand people. Thus, the total population decline in Russia, amounting to 1992-1997. about 4.2 million people, was more than half compensated by net migration from neighboring countries (3,310 thousand) 456 (Table 11.4).
Table 11.4
Components of population change in Russia
With 1951 By 1996 G.
|
Periods years |
Population size to the end period, year (thousand people) |
Average annual high rates growth(%) |
General increase (decrease) (thousand people) |
Including (thousand people) |
|
|
natural |
migration |
||||
Page 1
Downward mobility can also cause extremely unpleasant consequences for individuals and, naturally, to an even greater extent than upward mobility. Social decline breaks primary ties with friends and many relatives, can break up families, and put barriers between fathers and children. Let's take, for example, a young married couple in which the spouses are equally strongly motivated by mobility and achievement. If different abilities spouses, various conditions and circumstances will exalt one of them, the other will experience painful difficulties. Mutual tension and breakdown of relationships may occur. Statistics show that families often break up for this very reason.
Downward mobility can also cause extremely unpleasant consequences for individuals and, naturally, to an even greater extent than upward mobility. Social decline breaks primary ties with friends and many relatives, can break up families, and put barriers between fathers and children. Let's take, for example, a young married couple in which the spouses are equally strongly motivated by mobility and achievement.
Similarly, downward mobility exists in the form of both pushing individuals from high social statuses to lower ones and lowering the social statuses of an entire group. An example of the second form of downward mobility is the decline in the social status of a professional group of engineers, which once occupied very high positions in our society, or the decline in the status of a political party that is losing real power.
Indeed, the market, even in its initial state, increased the requirements for the qualities of both the employer and the employee. This was partly due to negative factors downward mobility. But the influence of bringing the illusory social status to the real one prevails.
Although downgrading in social status is less common than upgrading, downward mobility is still a widespread phenomenon. About 20% of the UK population is subject to it during the process of generational change (intergenerational mobility), although most of these are short social movements. There is also intragenerational downgrading. It is this type of downward mobility that most often gives rise to psychological problems, as people lose the ability to maintain their usual lifestyle.
Society can elevate the status of some individuals and lower the status of others. And this is understandable: some individuals who have talent, energy, and youth must displace other individuals who do not have these qualities from higher statuses. Depending on this, a distinction is made between upward and downward social mobility, or social ascent and social decline. Upward currents of professional, economic and political mobility exist in two main forms: as individual ascent, or the infiltration of individuals from a lower stratum to a higher one, and as the creation of new groups of individuals with the inclusion of groups in the upper stratum next to or instead of existing groups of this stratum [92 , With. Similarly, downward mobility exists in the form of both pushing individuals from high social statuses to lower ones and lowering the social statuses of an entire group. An example of the second form of downward mobility is the decline in the social status of a professional troupe of engineers that once occupied very high positions in our society, or the decline in the status of a political party that is losing real power.
Let us highlight another mechanism of social stratification, which is associated with a change in a person’s position in the system of social statuses - social mobility. At birth, a person receives the social status of his parents, the so-called ascriptive, or prescribed, status. Parents, relatives and people close to the family pass on to the child those norms of behavior, ideas about what is proper and prestigious that prevail in their environment. However, during the active period of his activity, a person may not be content with his position in this layer, but may aspire and achieve more. In the latter case, it acquires the achieved status. If a person’s status is changed to a more prestigious, better one, then we can say that upward mobility has taken place. However, as a result of life disasters (job loss, illness, etc.) a person can move to a lower status group - and downward mobility is triggered. Researchers have a system of statistical procedures and indicators that make it possible to distinguish different types of social mobility (intergenerational, professional, etc.), which generally makes it possible to analyze different kinds population movements.
Pages: 1
Horizontal mobility is the transition of an individual from one social group to another, located at the same level (example: moving from an Orthodox to a Catholic religious group, from one citizenship to another). There is a distinction between individual mobility - the movement of one person independently of others, and group mobility - movement occurs collectively. In addition, geographic mobility is distinguished - moving from one place to another while maintaining the same status (example: international and interregional tourism, moving from city to village and back). As a type of geographic mobility, the concept is distinguished migration- moving from one place to another with a change in status (example: a person moved to the city for permanent residence and changed his profession).
Vertical mobility
Vertical mobility is the advancement of a person up or down the career ladder.
Upward mobility - social rise, upward movement (For example: promotion).
Downward mobility - social descent, downward movement (For example: demotion).
Generational mobility
Intergenerational mobility is a comparative change in social status among different generations (example: a worker's son becomes president).
Intragenerational mobility (social career) - a change in status within one generation (example: a turner becomes an engineer, then a shop manager, then a plant director). Vertical and horizontal mobility are influenced by gender, age, birth rate, death rate, and population density. In general, men and the young are more mobile than women and the elderly. Overpopulated countries more often experience the consequences of emigration (relocation from one country to another due to economic, political, personal circumstances) than immigration (moving to a region for permanent or temporary residence of citizens from another region). Where the birth rate is high, the population is younger and therefore more mobile, and vice versa.
20. Stratification of modern Russian society
Modern studies of the factors, criteria and patterns of stratification of Russian society make it possible to identify layers and groups that differ in both social status and place in the process of reforming Russian society. According to hypothesis put forward by RAS academician T.I. Zaslavskaya, Russian society consists of four social layers: upper, middle, basic and lower, as well as a desocialized “social bottom”. Upper layer includes, first of all, the actual ruling layer, which acts as the main subject of reforms. It includes elite and subelite groups that occupy the most important positions in the public administration system, in economic and security structures. They are united by the fact of being in power and the ability to directly influence the reform processes. The middle layer is the embryo of the middle layer in the Western sense of the term. True, the majority of its representatives do not have capital that ensures personal independence, or a level of professionalism that meets the requirements of a post-industrial society, or high social prestige. In addition, this layer is still too small and cannot serve as a guarantor of social stability. In the future, a full-fledged middle stratum in Russia will be formed on the basis of social groups that today form the corresponding proto-stratum. These are small entrepreneurs, managers of medium and small enterprises, the middle level of the bureaucracy, senior officers, the most qualified and capable specialists and workers. The basic social stratum covers more than 2/3 of Russian society. Its representatives have average professional and qualification potential and relatively limited labor potential. The base layer includes the bulk of the intelligentsia (specialists), semi-intelligentsia (assistants to specialists), technical personnel, workers in mass trade and service professions, and most of the peasantry. Although the social status, mentality, interests and behavior of these groups are different, their role in the transition process is quite similar - this is, first of all, adaptation to changing conditions in order to survive and, if possible, maintain the achieved status. The lower layer closes the main, socialized part of society; its structure and functions seem to be the least clear. The distinctive features of its representatives are low activity potential and inability to adapt to the harsh socio-economic conditions of the transition period. Basically, this layer consists of elderly, poorly educated, not very healthy and strong people, from those who do not have professions, and often no permanent occupation, place of residence, unemployed, refugees and forced migrants from areas of interethnic conflicts. Signs of representatives of this layer are very low personal and family income, low level of education, employment in unskilled labor or lack of permanent work. The social bottom is characterized mainly by isolation from the social institutions of large society, compensated by inclusion in specific criminal and semi-criminal institutions. This implies the isolation of social ties mainly within the stratum itself, desocialization, and loss of skills of legitimate social life. Representatives of the social bottom are criminals and semi-criminal elements - thieves, bandits, drug dealers, brothel keepers, small and large swindlers, hired killers, as well as degenerate people - alcoholics, drug addicts, prostitutes, tramps, homeless people, etc. Other researchers present a picture of social strata in modern Russia as follows: economic and political elite (no more than 0.5%); top layer (6.5%); middle layer (21%); remaining layers (72%). The upper layer includes the top of the state bureaucracy, most of the generals, large landowners, heads of industrial corporations, financial institutions, large and successful entrepreneurs. A third of the representatives of this group are not older than 30 years, the share of women is less than a quarter, the share of non-Russians is one and a half times higher than the national average. In recent years, noticeable aging of this layer has been observed, which indicates that it is confined within its boundaries. The level of education is very high, although not much higher than that of the middle stratum. Two-thirds live in large cities, a third own their own enterprises and firms, a fifth are engaged in highly paid mental work, 45% are employed, most of them in the public sector. The incomes of this stratum, unlike the incomes of the rest, are growing faster than prices, i.e. here further accumulation of wealth occurs. The material situation of this layer is not just higher, it is qualitatively different from the situation of others. Thus, the top layer has the most powerful economic and energy potential and can be considered as new owner Russia, on whom, it would seem, we should place our hopes. However, this layer is highly criminalized, socially selfish and short-sighted - it does not show concern for strengthening and maintaining the current situation. In addition, he is in defiant confrontation with the rest of society, and partnerships with other social groups are difficult. Using their rights and new opportunities, the upper layer is not adequately aware of the responsibilities and duties that accompany these rights. For these reasons, there is no reason to pin hopes on Russia’s development along a liberal path with this layer. The middle layer is the most promising in this sense. It is developing very quickly (in 1993 it was 14%, in 1996 it was already 21%). Socially, its composition is extremely heterogeneous and includes: the lower business layer - small businesses (44%); qualified specialists - professionals (37%); middle level of employees (middle bureaucrats, military personnel, non-production workers (19%). The number of all these groups is growing, with professionals being the fastest, followed by businessmen, and office workers slower than others. The selected groups occupy positions higher or lower, so it is more correct to consider they are not by middle layers, but by groups of one middle layer or, more precisely, groups of the proto-stratum, since many of its features are just being formed (the boundaries are still blurred, political integration is weak, self-identification is low.) The financial situation of the proto-stratum is improving: from 1993 to 1996, the share of the poor decreased from 23 to 7%. However, the social well-being of this group is subject to the most dramatic fluctuations, especially for employees. At the same time, it is this proto-stratum that should be considered as a potential source of the formation (apparently in two to three decades) of a real middle stratum - a class that capable of gradually becoming a guarantor of social sustainability of society, uniting that part of Russian society that has the greatest socially active innovative potential and is more interested in the liberalization of social relations.(Maksimov A. Middle class translated into Russian//Open Politics. 1998. May. pp. 58-63.)
21. Personality- a concept developed to reflect social nature of man, considering him as a subject of sociocultural life, defining him as a bearer of an individual principle, self-revealing in the contexts of social relations, communication and objective activity . By “personality” we understand: 1) the human individual as a subject of relationships and conscious activity (“person” - in in a broad sense words) or 2) a stable system of socially significant traits that characterize an individual as a member of a particular society or community. Although these two concepts - face as the integrity of a person (Latin persona) and personality as his social and psychological appearance (Latin regsonalitas) - are terminologically quite distinguishable, they are sometimes used as synonyms.
22. Sociological theories of personality. Status-role concept of personality.
There are psychodynamic, analytical, humanistic, cognitive, behavioral, activity and dispositive theories of personality.
The founder of the psychodynamic theory of personality, also known as “classical psychoanalysis,” is the Austrian scientist S. Freud. Within the framework of psychodynamic theory, personality is a system of sexual and aggressive motives, on the one hand, and defense mechanisms, on the other, and the personality structure is an individually different ratio of individual properties, individual blocks (instances) and defense mechanisms.
The analytical theory of personality is close to the theory of classical psychoanalysis, since it has many common roots with it. The most prominent representative of this approach is the Swiss researcher K. Jung. According to analytical theory, personality is a set of innate and realized archetypes, and personality structure is defined as the individual originality of the relationship between individual properties of archetypes, individual blocks of the unconscious and conscious, as well as extroverted or introverted personality attitudes.
Proponents of the humanistic theory of personality in psychology (K. Rogers and A. Maslow) consider innate tendencies towards self-actualization to be the main source of personality development. Within the framework of humanistic theory, personality is the inner world of the human “I” as a result of self-actualization, and the structure of personality is the individual relationship between the “real Self” and the “ideal Self,” as well as the individual level of development of needs for self-actualization.
The cognitive theory of personality is close to the humanistic one, but it has a number of significant differences. The founder of this approach is the American psychologist J. Kelly. In his opinion, the only thing a person wants to know in life is what happened to him and what will happen to him in the future. According to cognitive theory, personality is a system of organized personal constructs in which a person’s personal experience is processed (perceived and interpreted). The structure of personality within the framework of this approach is considered as an individually unique hierarchy of constructs.
The behavioral theory of personality also has another name - “scientific”, since the main thesis of this theory states: our personality is a product of learning. Within this approach, personality is a system of social skills and conditioned reflexes, on the one hand, and a system of internal factors: self-efficacy, subjective significance and accessibility, on the other. According to the behavioral theory of personality, personality structure is a complexly organized hierarchy of reflexes or social skills, in which the leading role is played by the internal blocks of self-efficacy, subjective significance and accessibility.
The activity theory of personality has become most widespread in Russian psychology. Among the researchers who made the greatest contribution to its development, we should name, first of all, S. L. Rubinshtein, K. A. Abulkhanova-Slavskaya, A. V. Brushlinsky. Within the framework of activity theory, a person is a conscious subject who occupies a certain position in society and performs a socially useful public role. Personality structure is a complexly organized hierarchy of individual properties, blocks (direction, abilities, character, self-control) and systemic existential-being properties of a personality.
Proponents of the dispositional theory of personality consider the main source of personality development to be factors of gene-environment interaction, with some directions emphasizing primarily influences from genetics, others - from the environment. Within the framework of dispositional theory, personality is a complex system of formal-dynamic properties (temperament), traits and socially determined properties. Personality structure is an organized hierarchy of individual biologically determined properties that are included in certain relationships and form certain types of temperament and traits, as well as a set of meaningful properties.
Status-role concept of personality.
The role theory of personality describes its social behavior with 2 main concepts: “social status” and “social role”.
Each person in the social system occupies several positions. Each of these positions, which implies certain rights and responsibilities, is called status. A person can have several statuses. But more often than not, only one determines his position in society. This status is called main or integral. It often happens that the main status is determined by his position (for example, director, professor). Social status is reflected both in external behavior and appearance (clothing, jargon) and in internal position (attitudes, values, orientations).
There are prescribed and acquired statuses. The prescribed status is determined by society regardless of the efforts and merits of the individual. It is determined by origin, place of birth, family, etc. The acquired (achieved) status is determined by the efforts and abilities of the person himself (for example, writer, doctor, expert, management consultant, doctor of science, etc.).
There are also natural and professional official statuses. The natural status of a person presupposes significant and relatively stable characteristics of a person (man, woman, child, youth, old man, etc.). Professional and official status is the basic status of an individual; for an adult it is most often the basis of social status. It records the social, economic, organizational, production, and managerial position (engineer, chief technologist, shop manager, human resources manager, etc.). Typically, two forms of profession status are noted: economic and prestigious. The economic component of the social status of a profession (economic status) depends on the level of material remuneration expected when choosing and implementing a professional path (choice of profession, professional self-determination). The prestigious component of social status depends on the profession (prestigious status, prestige of the profession).
Social status denotes the specific place that an individual occupies in a given social system. The totality of demands placed on an individual by society forms the content of a social role. A social role is a set of actions that a person occupying a given status in the social system must perform. Each status usually includes a number of roles.
One of the first attempts to systematize roles was made by T. Parsons. He believed that every role is described by 5 main characteristics:
1. emotional - some roles require emotional restraint, others - looseness
2. method of obtaining - some are prescribed, others are conquered
3. scale - some roles are formulated and strictly limited, others are blurred
4. normalization - action in strictly established rules, or arbitrarily
5. motivation - for personal profit, for the common good
The social role should be considered in 2 aspects:
role expectations
· role-playing.
There is never a complete coincidence between them. But each of them is of great importance in the behavior of an individual. Our roles are determined primarily by what others expect of us. These expectations are associated with the status that a given person has.
In the normal structure of a social role, 4 elements are usually distinguished:
1. description of the type of behavior corresponding to this role
2. prescription (requirements) associated with this behavior
3. assessment of fulfillment of the prescribed role
4. sanctions - the social consequences of a particular action within the framework of the requirements of the social system. Social sanctions can be moral in nature, implemented directly by a social group through its behavior (contempt), or legal, political, or environmental.
It should be noted that any role is not a pure model of behavior. The main link between role expectations and role behavior is the character of the individual, i.e. the behavior of a particular person does not fit into a pure scheme.
Society these days is developing at a rapid pace. This leads to the emergence of new positions, a significant increase in the number of social movements, their speed and frequency.
What's happened
Sorokin Pitirim was the first to study such a concept as social mobility. Today, many researchers continue the work he began, since its relevance is very great.
Social mobility is expressed in the fact that the position of a particular person in the hierarchy of groups, in his relation to the means of production, in the division of labor and in general in the system of production relations is significantly transformed. This change is associated with the loss or acquisition of property, moving to a new position, obtaining an education, mastering a profession, getting married, etc.
People are in constant motion, and society is constantly evolving. This indicates the variability of its structure. The totality of all social movements, that is, changes in an individual or group, is included in the concept of social mobility.
Examples in history
Since ancient times, this topic has been relevant and aroused interest. For example, the unexpected fall of a person or his rise is a favorite plot of many folk tales: a wise and cunning beggar becomes a rich man; hardworking Cinderella finds a rich prince and marries him, thereby increasing her prestige and status; the poor prince suddenly becomes a king.
However, the movement of history is determined mainly not by individuals, not by their social mobility. Social groups are what is more important to her. The landed aristocracy, for example, was replaced at a certain stage by the financial bourgeoisie, from modern production people with low-skilled professions are being forced out by “white collar” workers - programmers, engineers, operators. Revolutions and wars reshaped the top of the pyramid, raising some and lowering others. Such changes in Russian society occurred, for example, in 1917, after the October Revolution.
Let's consider various grounds, by which social mobility can be divided, and its corresponding types.
1. Social mobility intergenerational and intragenerational
Any movement of a person between or layers means his mobility down or up within the social structure. Note that this may concern one generation or two or three. The change in the position of children compared to the positions of their parents is evidence of their mobility. On the contrary, social stability occurs when a certain position of generations is preserved.
Social mobility can be intergenerational (intergenerational) and intragenerational (intragenerational). In addition, there are 2 main types of it - horizontal and vertical. In turn, they fall into subtypes and subspecies, closely related to each other.
Intergenerational social mobility means an increase or, conversely, a decrease in the status in society of representatives of subsequent generations in relation to the status of the current one. That is, children achieve a higher or lower position in society than their parents. For example, if the son of a miner becomes an engineer, we can talk about intergenerational upward mobility. And the downward trend is observed if the son of a professor works as a plumber.
Intragenerational mobility is a situation in which the same person, beyond comparison with his parents, changes his position in society several times throughout his life. This process is otherwise called a social career. A turner, for example, can become an engineer, then a shop manager, then he can be promoted to plant director, after which he can take the position of minister of the engineering industry.
2. Vertical and horizontal
Vertical mobility is the movement of an individual from one stratum (or caste, class, estate) to another.
Depending on the direction of this movement, upward mobility (upward movement, social ascent) and downward mobility (downward movement, social descent) are distinguished. For example, promotion is an example of upward mobility, while demotion or dismissal is an example of downward movement.
The concept of horizontal social mobility means that an individual moves from a social group to another that is at the same level. Examples include moving from a Catholic to an Orthodox religious group, changing citizenship, moving from one’s parental family to one’s own, from one profession to another.
Geographic mobility
Geographical social mobility is a type of horizontal. It does not mean a change in group or status, but a move to another place while maintaining the same social status. An example is interregional and international tourism, moving and back. Geographic social mobility in modern society is also a transition from one company to another while maintaining status (for example, accountant).
Migration
We have not yet considered all the concepts related to the topic of interest to us. The theory of social mobility also highlights migration. We talk about it when a change of status is added to a change of place. For example, if a village resident came to the city to visit his relatives, then geographic mobility occurs. However, if he moved here for permanent residence and started working in the city, then this is already migration.
Factors influencing horizontal and vertical mobility
Note that the nature of horizontal and vertical social mobility of people is influenced by age, gender, mortality and birth rates, and population density. Men, and young people in general, are more mobile than older people and women. In overpopulated states, emigration is higher than immigration. In places with high level birth rate younger population and therefore more mobile. Young people are more likely to have professional mobility, older people - political mobility, and adults - economic mobility.
The birth rate is not equally distributed across classes. As a rule, the lower classes have more children, and the upper classes have fewer. The higher a person rises on the social ladder, the fewer children he has. Even if every son of a rich man takes the place of his father, voids will still form in the social pyramid, at its upper steps. They are filled by people from lower classes.
3. Social mobility group and individual
There are also group and individual mobility. Individual is the movement of a particular individual up, down or horizontally along the social ladder, regardless of other people. Group mobility is movement up, down or horizontally along the social ladder of a certain group of people. Eg, old class After the revolution, he is forced to cede his dominant position to the new one.
Group and individual mobility are connected in a certain way with achieved and ascribed statuses. In this case, the individual corresponds to a greater extent with the achieved status, and the group - with the ascribed one.
Organized and structured
These are the basic concepts of the topic that interests us. When considering the types of social mobility, organized mobility is sometimes also distinguished, when the movement of an individual or groups down, up or horizontally is controlled by the state, both with and without the consent of people. Organized voluntary mobility includes socialist organizational recruitment, conscription for construction sites, etc. Involuntary - dispossession and resettlement of small nations during the period of Stalinism.
Structural mobility, caused by changes in the very structure of the economy, should be distinguished from organized mobility. It occurs beyond the consciousness and will of individual people. For example, social mobility of a society is greater when professions or industries disappear. In this case, large masses of people move, and not just individuals.
For clarity, let us consider the conditions for increasing a person’s status in two subspaces - professional and political. Any rise of a government official up the career ladder is reflected as a change in rank in the government hierarchy. You can also increase your political weight by increasing your rank in the party hierarchy. If an official is one of the activists or functional members of the party that became ruling after the parliamentary elections, then he has a much greater chance of occupying a leadership position in the municipal or government controlled. And, of course, the professional status of an individual will increase after he receives a diploma of higher education.
Mobility intensity
The theory of social mobility introduces such a concept as the intensity of mobility. This is the number of individuals who change their social positions horizontally or vertically over a certain period of time. The number of such individuals in is the absolute intensity of mobility, while their share in the total number of this community is relative. For example, if we count the number of people under 30 who are divorced, then there is an absolute intensity of mobility (horizontal) in this age category. However, if we consider the ratio of the number of divorced people under the age of 30 to the number of all individuals, this will already be relative mobility in the horizontal direction.
Social mobility types and examples
Concept of social mobility
The concept of “social mobility” was introduced into scientific use by Pitirim Sorokin. These are various movements of people in society. Every person at birth occupies a certain position and is built into the system of stratification of society.
An individual's position at birth is not fixed and may change throughout life. It can go up or down.
Types of social mobility
There are various types of social mobility. Typically the following are distinguished:
- intergenerational and intragenerational;
- vertical and horizontal;
- organized and structured.
Intergenerational mobility means that children change their social position and become different from their parents. So, for example, the daughter of a seamstress becomes a teacher, that is, she increases her status in society. Or, for example, the son of an engineer becomes a janitor, that is, his social status decreases.
Intragenerational mobility means that an individual's status can change throughout his life. An ordinary worker can become a boss at an enterprise, a plant director, and then a manager of a complex of enterprises.
Vertical mobility means that the movement of a person or group of people within a society changes the social status of that person or group. This type of mobility is stimulated by various systems rewards (respect, income, prestige, benefits). Vertical mobility has different characteristics. one of them is intensity, that is, it determines how many strata an individual goes through on his way up.
If the society is socially disorganized, then the intensity indicator becomes higher. An indicator such as universality determines the number of people who have changed their vertical position over a certain period of time. Depending on the type of vertical mobility, two types of society are distinguished. It's closed and open.
In a closed society, moving up the social ladder is very difficult for certain categories of people. For example, these are societies in which there are castes, classes, and also a society in which there are slaves. There were many such communities in the Middle Ages.
In an open society, everyone has equal opportunities. These societies include democratic states. Pitirim Sorokin argues that there are no and never have been societies in which opportunities for vertical mobility were absolutely closed. At the same time, there have never been communities in which vertical movements were absolutely free. Vertical mobility can be either upward (in this case it is voluntary) or downward (in this case it is forced).
Horizontal mobility assumes that an individual moves from one group to another without changing social status. For example, this could be a change in religion. That is, an individual can convert from Orthodoxy to Catholicism. He can also change his citizenship, he can start his own family and leave his parents’ family, he can change his profession. In this case, the status of the individual does not change. If there is a move from one country to another, then such mobility is called geographical mobility. Migration is a type of geographic mobility in which the status of an individual changes after moving. Migration can be labor and political, internal and international, legal and illegal.
Organized mobility is a state-dependent process. It directs the movement of groups of people down, up or horizontally. This can happen with or without the consent of these people.
Structural mobility caused by changes that occur in the structure of society. Social mobility can be group or individual. Group mobility implies that movement occurs in entire groups. Group mobility is influenced by the following factors:
- uprisings;
- wars;
- replacement of the constitution;
- invasion of foreign troops;
- change of political regime.
- Individual social mobility depends on the following factors:
- level of education of the citizen;
- nationality;
- place of residence;
- quality of education;
- his family status;
- whether the citizen is married.
- Great importance for any type of mobility have age, gender, fertility and mortality.
Social mobility examples
Examples of social mobility can be found in large quantities in our lives. Thus, Pavel Durov, who was initially a simple student of the Faculty of Philology, can be considered an example of increasing growth in society. But in 2006, he was told about Facebook, and then he decided that he would create a similar network in Russia. At first it was called “Student.ru”, but then it was called Vkontakte. Now it has more than 70 million users, and Pavel Durov has a net worth of more than $260 million.
Social mobility often develops within subsystems. Thus, schools and universities are such subsystems. A university student must learn curriculum. If he successfully passes the exams, he will move on to the next course, receive a diploma, become a specialist, that is, receive a higher position. Expulsion from a university for poor performance is an example of downward social mobility.
An example of social mobility is the following situation: a person who received an inheritance, became rich, and moved to a more prosperous stratum of people. Examples of social mobility include the promotion of a school teacher to director, the promotion of an associate professor of a department to a professor, or the relocation of an enterprise employee to another city.
Vertical social mobility
Vertical mobility has been subject to the largest number research. The defining concept is mobility distance. It measures how many steps an individual goes through as he moves up in society. He can walk one or two steps, he can suddenly fly up to the very top of the stairs or fall to its base (the last two options are quite rare). The amount of mobility is important. It determines how many individuals have moved upward or downward through vertical mobility in a given period of time.
Social mobility channels
There are no absolute boundaries between social strata in society. Representatives of some layers can make their way into other layers. Movements occur with the help of social institutions. In wartime, the army acts as a social institution, which promotes talented soldiers and gives them new ranks if the previous commanders die. Another powerful channel of social mobility is the church, which at all times has found loyal representatives in the lower classes of society and elevated them.
Also channels of social mobility can be considered Institute of Education, and also family and marriage. If representatives of different social classes married, then one of them climbed the social ladder, or descended. For example, in ancient Roman society, a free man who married a slave could make her free. In the process of creating new layers of society - strata - groups of people appear who do not have generally accepted statuses or have lost them. They are called marginalized. Such people are characterized by the fact that they find it difficult and uncomfortable in their current status, they experience psychological stress. For example, this is an employee of an enterprise who became homeless and lost his home.
There are these types of marginals:
- ethnomarginals - people who appeared as a result of mixed marriages;
- biomarginals whose health society has ceased to care about;
- political outcasts who cannot come to terms with the existing political order;
- religious marginals - people who do not identify themselves with a generally accepted confession;
- criminal outcasts are people who violate the Criminal Code.
Social mobility in society
Social mobility may vary depending on the type of society. If we consider Soviet society, it was divided into economic classes. These were the nomenclature, the bureaucracy and the proletariat. Mechanisms of social mobility were then regulated by the state. Employees of district organizations were often appointed by party committees. The rapid movement of people occurred with the help of repression and construction projects of communism (for example, BAM and virgin soil). Western societies have a different structure of social mobility.
The main mechanism of social movement there is competition. Because of it, some go bankrupt, while others make high profits. If this is the political sphere, then the main mechanism of movement there is elections. In any society there are mechanisms that make it possible to soften the sharp downward transition of individuals and groups. This different shapes social assistance. On the other hand, representatives of higher strata seek to consolidate their high status and prevent representatives of lower strata from penetrating into the high strata. Social mobility largely depends on what kind of society it is. It can be open or closed.
An open society is characterized by the fact that the division into social classes is arbitrary, and it is quite easy to move from one class to another. To achieve a higher position in the social hierarchy, a person needs to struggle. People are motivated to work constantly because hard work leads to an increase in their social status and improved well-being. Therefore, people of the lower class constantly strive to break through to the top, and representatives of the upper class want to maintain their position. Unlike an open one, a closed social society has very clear boundaries between classes.
The social structure of society is such that the advancement of people between classes is practically impossible. In such a system, hard work does not matter, and the talents of a member of the lower caste also do not matter. Such a system is maintained by an authoritarian ruling structure. If the government weakens, then it becomes possible to change the boundaries between strata. The most outstanding example of a closed caste society can be considered India, in which the Brahmins, the highest caste, have the highest status. The lowest caste is the Shudras, the garbage collectors. Over time, the lack of significant changes in society leads to the degeneration of this society.
Social stratification and mobility
Social stratification divides people into classes. In post-Soviet society, the following classes began to appear: new Russians, entrepreneurs, workers, peasants, and the ruling class. Social strata in all societies have common features. Thus, people of mental labor occupy a higher position than simply workers and peasants. As a rule, there are no impenetrable boundaries between strata, but at the same time, a complete absence of boundaries is impossible.
Recently, social stratification in Western society has undergone significant changes due to the invasion of representatives of eastern world(Arabs). Initially they arrive as work force, that is, they perform low-skilled work. But these representatives bring their own culture and customs, often different from Western ones. Often, entire neighborhoods in Western cities live according to the laws of Islamic culture.
It must be said that social mobility in conditions of social crisis differs from social mobility in conditions of stability. War, revolution, and prolonged economic conflicts lead to changes in the channels of social mobility, often to mass impoverishment and increased morbidity. Under these conditions, stratification processes can differ significantly. Thus, representatives of criminal structures can make their way into the ruling circles.