Search

Through a brief examination of neo-Marxist and neo-Weberian arguments it is demonstrated that the class nature of the new middle class has yet to be established. The paper goes on to show that as well as differences arising out of material conditions (i.e. class differences), inequalities based on expectations of entitlement or norms are also significant in capitalist society. Weber's treatment of status has not encouraged an adequate understanding of the concept, and an alternative is outlined. The paper then argues that the differences between the so-called new middle class and the working class are reasonably understood on a number of criteria as differences between status groups which form part of a single class. Not only does this approach remove a number of difficulties from accounts of the salariat, it also helps explain the different political alignments of social collectivities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

IN A RECENT paper Mr. Runciman concludes by inviting replies to his argument that it is logically and conceptually useful to employ the tripartite distinction between `class' `status' and `power' in the analysis of social stratification. Mr. Runciman does not, of course, deny the existence of links between these three dimensions, but suggests that such links must be seen contingent empirical relationships and not necessary logical ones. I hope that the following paper will provide such a reply. It must be clear that the following criticism is directed, in the main, to those parts of the paper in which Mr. Runciman is concerned with the logical and conceptual problem. The essay in question also contains a clear and valuable assessment of the problems encountered in any attempt to measure the three types of inequality. In the first part of the paper I propose to give a critical assessment of certain central aspects of Mr. Runciman's argument and, in the second part, I will put forward a very brief formulation of what I consider to be a more meaningful alternative view of the relationships between class, status, and power. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is intended as a contribution to the formal theory of stratification systems. The paper has five sections. In Section I, a method for analytically inducing an order over a multi-dimensional status is discussed. It is believed that such a technique can aid in the specification of conceptual tasks within stratification theory, as well as serve as a baseline in actual measurements. It is subsequently employed in the axiomatic work of Sections 3 and 4. In Section 2, there is a brief discussion of the axiomatic method as a prelude to the system developed in the following two sections. In Section 3, the axioms are stated. In Section 4, various elementary consequences of the axioms are shown; most importantly, various concepts which are intuitively important in stratification theory are shown to be definable (e.g., a class system with a determinate number of classes). Finally, in Section s, there is a concluding discussion of the picture of stratification which emerges within this work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite its frequent use by sociologists there has been relatively little discussion of the practical difficulties involved in operationalizing the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys (OPCS) system of social class allocation. Using social class coding data from a national study of child development this paper examines one problem which occurs when using the OPCS scheme - illegal combinations of employment status and occupational codes. Attention is only focused on occupations falling into Social Class I and for these professional occupations it is shown that illegal combinations are the result of the OPCS conceptualization of the professions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 'Women and Class Analysis' (Sociology, November 1983), John Goldthorpe defends the conventional practice of making general claims about class from research focused mainly or exclusively on male 'heads' of households. The concern of this paper is to show that the submerging of women's class position with that of their husbands is not justified, and that it closes off some of the most intriguing issues in class analysis. Goldthorpe points to substantial similarity in the types of employment undertaken by husbands and their wives; are-analysis of his argument and evidence shows that the same data can actually be used to demonstrate a remarkable dissimilarity in the types of employment in which spouses are engaged - even greater dissimilarity than theorists of 'cross- class' marriages have claimed. It is argued that the conventional approach advocated by Goldthorpe both obscures the extent to which the class experience of wives differs from that of husbands, and ignores the extent to which the inequalities that divide women and men are themselves the outcome of the operation of the class system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While the sociological importance of popular class imagery has gained considerable attention in recent years, much empirical research continues to interpret class identifications and conceptions of class structure as evidence of fundamental class perspectives. This paper challenges the underlying assumptions of this position by directly examining popular sentiments about class and inequality. The results show that neither nominal class affiliations, nor conceptions of class structure, encompass ideologically homogeneous perspectives. Working and, especially, middle class identifications embrace diverse class sentiments, and these discrepancies within class affiliations are reinforced by differences in political preferences. Similarly, conceptions of a dichotomous class structure are not inevitably associated with particular class sentiments any more so than are conceptions of society as a graded hierarchy. In modem societies, where many traditional, ascriptive class barriers, distinctions and privileges have been eroded, class assumes a more fluid and indefinite meaning in social consciousness, diluting the links between class affiliations, conceptions of social structure, and class sentiments proper. In essence, class sentiments cannot be taken for granted, and require systematic investigation in their own right. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Analytical methodologies assume 'resolution into simple elements' as a necessary preliminary stage of scholarly investigation. They explicitly, or more often implicitly accept, therefore, that the conclusions reached reflect not only the phenomena analysed, but also the applied system of analytical subdivision. The paper explores and compares the main systems of analysis in current sociology: institutional, class and communal. It suggests a taxonomy of analytical systems and a cross-classification which is introduced to throw light on their conceptual properties at the societal as well as the individual level. It proceeds by discussing the issues of: (A) The societal roots of selection of analytical schemes in sociology; (B) The advantages and blind spots of the specific analytical systems; and (C) Attempts at the integration and reduction of analytical systems in contemporary sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is concerned with the influence of the policy of local education authorities upon educational attainment. We suggest that the influence of local policy has been neglected in the sociology of education and hypothesize that policy variables are likely to be of major importance as determinants of attainment. Evidence drawn from correlations of policy, provision and social-class variables with each other and with various measures of attainment tends to validate this suggestion, and indicates that two `policy- models' of local authority activity may be appropriate: viz, the elite-orientated authority model, in which resources are differentially concentrated on a sponsored elite with consequent high attainment of this elite; and the egalitarian authority model where resources are more evenly spread throughout the school system with consequent `inferior' attainment of an elitist kind, but where the evidence suggests there is higher overall attainment of the total school system product. It would also appear that the determinant of the policy set pursued by an LEA. is the social class background of the area it covers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Class is often overlooked in sociological studies of death, just as studies of class overlook death. The controversial media coverage of the death of Jade Goody provides a useful focus for exploring contemporary class-making. Recent sociological analyses of class representations in popular culture have demonstrated how denigration and humiliation serve as mechanisms which position sections of the white, working class (chavs) as repositories of bad taste. We argue that these are not the only (or even the most prevalent) affective mechanisms for class-making. In this article, we explore how cultural imperatives for ‘dying well’ intersect with what could be perceived as more positive or even affectionate representations of Jade to produce ‘good taste’ as naturalised properties of the middle class. As such, we demonstrate that the circulation of inequalities through precarious and dynamic cultural representations involves more complex affective mechanisms in class boundary work than is often recognised. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Informal carers in the context of late modernity must negotiate two potentially conflicting discourses. One is associated with a post-traditional and increasingly individualized society characterized by 'pure' relationships with an emphasis on authenticity and choice. The other is a more traditional discourse found particularly in current health and social policy which relies explicitly on significant input by family carers. This article analyses the tensions arising from this paradox, specifically for older carers engaged in long-term care relationships. The first, theoretical, section provides an overview of the 'subjective turn' associated with modernity together with the heterogeneous ethics of governmentality associated with liberal rule. The second, empirical, section discusses 'moral narratives' drawn from carers' accounts of caregiving. The conclusion highlights the social contexts in which carers make moral choices and identifies the links between policy normativities on the one hand and inequality and resistance on the other. Informal carers in the context of late modernity must negotiate two potentially conflicting discourses. One is associated with a post-traditional and increasingly individualized society characterized by 'pure' relationships with an emphasis on authenticity and choice. The other is a more traditional discourse found particularly in current health and social policy which relies explicitly on significant input by family carers. This article analyses the tensions arising from this paradox, specifically for older carers engaged in long-term care relationships. The first, theoretical, section provides an overview of the 'subjective turn' associated with modernity together with the heterogeneous ethics of governmentality associated with liberal rule. The second, empirical, section discusses 'moral narratives' drawn from carers' accounts of caregiving. The conclusion highlights the social contexts in which carers make moral choices and identifies the links between policy normativities on the one hand and inequality and resistance on the other. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the relationship between feelings of envy and the communication of dissatisfaction with inequalities and exploitation. While envy is often correlated with the expression of illegitimate resentments, certain envious feelings can be viewed as completely legitimate complaints of distributive inequalities. Because of social norms, these legitimate concerns are often silenced by the moral meanings associated with envy. The author examines the potentiality of social envies to explore the emergence of social resentments.

This article examines some of the implications for the sociological analysis of social class of the migration of geodemographic classifications of various sorts into software systems designed to 'sort out' people and places. It begins by offering an overview of the history and development of geodemographic classifications. It then argues that such classifications are increasingly becoming embedded in 'software sorting' procedures of various sorts, which in turn leads to the prospect of 'automated spatiality' becoming a common feature of the contemporary constitution of social class. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mistakes are inherent in the process of research but can illuminate it. Some of the author's mistakes have been false assumptions shared with others of his generation. His early work lacked a sufficiently sharp focus for him to be able to make any interesting mistakes. In 1967 he dared that race was used as a role sign when he should have claimed that phenotypical differences were so used. He tended to take race as a synonym for colour; and failed to appreciate that a social construct could not be a basis for a general theory. His subsequent attempts to correct these mistakes are outlined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In rejecting both arguments of the death of class, and the increasingly minimalist positions of class traditionalist, a newer generation of theorists have transformed the scope and analytical framework of class analysis: inflating 'class' to include social and cultural formations, reconfiguring the causal model that has underpinned class analysis, and abandoning the notion of distinct class identities or problems with transforming 'class' in this fashion, although the difficulty lies not in the departures from traditional class theory, but rather in what is retained. The uneasy relationship between older and newer aspects of 'class' within renewed class theory means the wider implications of inequality consider as individualized hierarchy (rather than as 'class') have not been fully explored The debate on class identities (an important example of this new form of class analysis) illustrates these difficulties, and shows that issues of hierarchy extend well beyond issues of class. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]