Table of Contents
Conflict theory states that society or an association functions so that every individual member and its groups battle to expand their advantages, which unavoidably adds to social change, for example, political changes and transformations. A theory propounded by theorist Karl Marx claims that society is in a condition of constant clash because of rivalry for constrained economic resources. Conflict theory holds that social order is kept up by control and power as opposed to agreement and similarity. For example, conflict theorists may clarify the social liberties developments of the 1960s by studying how activists tested the racially unequal circulation of political force and financial resources. This paper discusses theories of sociology as applied to the U.S economy. The theories including social conflict theory, interactionism, and functionalist theories try to justify the economic inequality in the USA; the theories explain the reasons for the income gaps between the rich and the poor in American society and in other developed countries.
Social conflict hypothesis is a major paradigm in sociology that perspectives society as a stadium of disparity that produces strife and social change. Key components in this point of view are that society is organized to advantage few members to the detriment of the prominent part; variables, for example, race, sex, class, and age are connected to the social disparity. To a sociologist, it is about amazing group versus minority group relations. Karl Marx is regarded as the father of social conflict theory (Lussier & Achua, 2015).
Conflict theorists contend that stratification is broken and hurtful in the public eye. As indicated by conflict theory, social stratification advantages the rich and capable to the detriment of poor people in the USA. Subsequently, it makes a system of winners and failures that are kept up by the individuals who are on the top. Those who are not so successful do not get a reasonable opportunity to contend, and in this manner, such people are stuck on the base (Giddens, Duneier, Appelbaum, & Carr , 2000). For instance, numerous affluent families in the USA pay low wages to babysitters to look after their children, to gardeners to take care of their rose greenhouses, and to housekeepers to wash their filthy socks. These small wage specialists do not make enough to move past a paycheck-to-paycheck way of life and they have no way to advance. In this way, conflict theorists trust that this focused framework, together with the way of altering the diversion, winds up making and sustaining stratification systems (Hirshleifer, 2001).
Limited time Offer
The U.S Government, which supports capitalism, a financial framework taking into account free-market rivalry, especially advantages the rich by expecting that the stream down system is an ideal approach to spreading the benefits of riches crosswise over society. In promoting capitalism, the USA frequently set up corporate welfare through direct appropriations, tax cuts, and other support that advantage big organizations (Lussier & Achua, 2015). They expect that the business sector will permit these benefits to the wealthy to advance toward the poor through competition. For instance, the Walton family, the proprietors of Wal-Mart, receives massive tax reductions. Whether the advantages of these tax cuts have advanced down to healthy individuals through better business practices or better-working conditions for Wal-Mart representatives is faulty thinking. Conflict theorists would argue that they have not; instead, these tax cuts have been utilized by the Walton family to set the examples of stratification that keep the family rich (Hirshleifer, 2001).
Income Gap between the Rich and the Poor
Functionalism deciphers every part of society regarding how it adds to the stability of entire society. It has its starting points in the works of Emile Durkheim, who was particularly keen on how social order is conceivable or how society remains moderately stable. Society is more than the aggregate of its parts; rather, every part of society is practical for the security of entire society (Giddens et al., 2000). For instance, the state gives education to the children of the family that pays yearly taxes, on which the U.S state depends on to run the government. The family depends on the school to offer children some assistance with growing up to have certain employments so they can raise and support their particular households. All the while, the children get to be decent, taxpaying residents, who thus support the state (Lussier & Achua, 2015).
From functionalist point of view, the U.S social orders carried on the security and interior union are necessary for continuity of the two factors in future. In the functionalist perspective, American society is thought to have capacity of living beings, with different social foundations cooperating like body organs to keep up and reproduce them. This methodology in the USA accepts that the system of stratification is reasonable and rational, and that the best individuals wind up on top in light of their predominance. In real life, the system does not work so effortlessly or superbly. Former U.S. President George W. Bush, for instance, was not the sharpest or most politically capable individual but rather he was all around associated and conceived at the highest point of the stratification system, and in this way, he was chosen to a position with overwhelming force – the U.S. administration (Giddens et al., 2000). It bodes well for the CEO of an organization whose position is essentially practically to profit than a laborer working for the same organization. In another illustration, a grade teacher in the USA earns $29,000 every year, while a National Basketball Association player can make as much as $21 million every year.
Related Economics essays