Social stratification systems: caste versus class

Social Stratification

Transcending Class in the United States

The parallels between the caste system in East India and the class system in the United States shed light on the vast economic inequality that subsumes America. It is undeniable that there are stark differences between the inequality in the two countries; as Berremen (1960) explains, the East Indian caste system is based out of sociological (religious, residential, occupational) factors, while class difference in the United States is borne out of biological factors -- namely, one's skin color. Despite these differences, however, there also exist similarities; both class and caste are biologically determined, and self-perpetuating. Those in "lower" classes typically feed the interests of the dominant class, and as a result, those with power have little motivation for overhauling the existing dynamic. Moreover, the class dynamics have existed since the country's inception, further compounding the possibility for class transcendence. Nevertheless, it is a truism (and the very embodiment of the American Dream) that any individual can improve their fortune with requisite focus and determination. This paper examines whether an individual can transcend their class in the United States, and whether the class system in the United States is any more progressive than the Indian caste system.

The question of whether an individual can transcend class in American society must invariably take into consideration a number of factors, including race, ethnicity and the geographical region in which one resides. To this end, the task of transcending one's class typically involves "passing" from one's subordinated cultural attribute to another. However, this is no simple task; indeed, as Kroeger (2003) delineates, the class systems in the United States are rigidly enforced. In the introduction to his book, Kroeger (via a reading of Imitation of Life) states that society has created a dynamic in which "Passing, if not altogether bad, is at least a really bad idea" (p. 2). Accordingly, people are forever chastised for belonging to a subordinate class, regardless of whether they "improve" their status. While class transcendence is not unlawful, there is societal stigma associated with it and people are expected to remain within their class.

In society, there are examples of people who have been able to transcend their class. For example, basketball stars like Michael Jordan and Isiah Thomas were able to ascend from abject poverty to extreme wealth through their athletic achievements. However, despite their wealth one can reasonably raise the question of whether these individuals were ever able to transcend their class. Indeed, "transcendence" implies that one has completely dissociated himself from his prior class, and this is unlikely or perhaps even impossible. The very fact that people constantly laud how Michael Jordan has gone from "rags to riches" exemplifies how one can never shed their original class identity. In this regard, the question of whether one can transcend their class depends in large part on the specific definition of transcendence, class status, and the attributes of the constituent classes.