Take Home Questions Essay Research Paper Sociology free essay sample

Take Home Questions Essay, Research Paper Sociology 103 Take Home Questions 1.Ethnic stratification is a rank order of groups, each made up of people with presumed common cultural or physical features interacting in forms of laterality and subordination. To get down with, all systems of cultural stratification are merchandises of the contact of antecedently separated groups. Initial contact may be in the signifier of conquering, appropriation, voluntary in-migration, or nonvoluntary in-migration. Following contact, groups engage in competition, position one another ethnocentrically, and, finally, one imposes its superior power over the others, emerging as the dominant group. Cultural stratification systems are created by the motion of people across national boundaries, normally conveying with them different linguistic communications and cultural systems, or by the constitution of new political boundaries. Multiethnic societies are formed through one or a combination of several contact forms. The first factor critical to the outgrowth of cultural stratification or inequality is Conquest. We will write a custom essay sample on Take Home Questions Essay Research Paper Sociology or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Conquest is a signifier of contact in which people of one society repress all or portion of another society and take on the function of the dominant group. European colonialism of the eighteenth and 19th centuries best exemplifies this form. The following factor to the outgrowth of cultural stratification is Annexation. It is a political happening in which a portion or perchance all of one society is incorporated into another. If a collected society has a dominant group, so the cultural groups within that society go subsidiary at the point that sovereignty is transferred. Such appropriation may happen in a peaceful or a violent mode. Following appropriation, the most common forms by which cultural groups come into contact involve in-migration. The in-migration of peoples from one society to another may be either voluntary or nonvoluntary. The head beginning of cultural heterogeneousness in the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand has been voluntary in-migration. The main aim of people who emigrate from their place society is normally economic improvement though sometimes political or spiritual considerations play an of import function. Demographers who study migration forms refer to factors of? push and draw? that motivate people to go forth their original society and migrate to one that promises improved conditions of life. The? pull? happens in times of economic adversity, people will be encouraged to emigrate if they perceive more favourable economic chances in another society. Depressed economic conditions, affecting minimum occupation chances and low rewards, along with a low outlook of improvement of such conditions, represent the? push? . Extra push factors were the addition in evictions by landlords and the unlikeliness of any major political alterations that would hold improved the economic state of affairs. On the pull side, the most appealing societies were those in demand of unskilled labour, like the United States and Canada, which were so in the primary phases of industrialisation. Finally, Involuntary in-migration involves the forced transportation of peoples from one society to another. Such forced motions are best exemplified by the slave trade of the seventeenth, eighteenth, and 19th centuries, which brought 1000000s of inkinesss from Africa to work the cotton and sugar plantations of the United States, Brazil, and the West Indies. Lieberson? s theory is that the nature by which diverse ethnic groups ab initio run into has been shown to be a critical factor in explicating the outgrowth of cultural inequality and the particular patterns it later takes. He distinguishes two major types of contact state of affairss. The first type, migratory hypernymy, is illustrated by assorted colonial conquerings in which a technologically and organizationally more powerful migratory group subdues the native population. The 2nd, autochthonal hypernymy, is characteristic of most voluntary and nonvoluntary in-migrations such as those to North America ; in these instances, the arriving groups are ab initio made subsidiary to a resident dominant group. Lieberson maintains that long-run struggle is more likely in societies where the autochthonal population at initial contact is low-level. Native groups less powerful than the arriving colonials are left with few options other than opposition to the new societal order imposed on them. This ill will is further strengthened when the conquest group, over clip, becomes itself an autochthonal group. It is the comparative power of the migrator and autochthonal groups that determines the eventual nature of cultural stratification in each of these state of affairss. Where an invading group is successful in ruling the native population, the political and economic systems of the new group are imposed, and warfare and general struggle are likely to ensue rapidly. Situations in which the indigen group wields greater power and immigrant groups enter as subsidiaries produce less open struggle ab initio. The autochthonal group retains control over the size and character of in-migration and may encourage speedy assimilation, as in the instance of most European immigrants to the United States. Furthermore, struggle is diminished by the fact that if the in-migration is voluntary, disgruntled immigrants may return to their society of beginning. Although the nature of initial group reach my be of import in giving rise to and determining the eventual system of cultural stratification, Donald Noel has pointed three extra factors in 1968. They are ethnocentrism, competition for scarce societal resources, and an unequal distribution of power. On initial contact, divergent groups will justice each other in footings of their ain civilization, ethnocentrically. Given the nature of ethnocentrism, these ratings will normally be negative. The negative judgements will depend on the grade of difference between the groups: The more dissimilar they are, the more negative the judgement. When culturally dissimilar groups meet, so, ethnocentrism can be expected to epitomize intergroup attitudes. However, ethnocentrism entirely is non sufficient to bring forth cultural stratification. Groups may see one another negatively without the necessary outgrowth of dominant-subordinate dealingss among them. An extra requirement is competition, structured along cultural lines. Noel poses that the more intense the competition, the greater the likeliness of the outgrowth of cultural stratification. When groups strive for the same scarce resources, their interrelatednesss take on the features of competition and struggle. Within the competitory sphere, those groups with the greatest capacity to accommodate to the societal and physical environment will stop up higher in the cultural hierarchy. Differential power among the assorted groups is the concluding requirement for the development of cultural stratification. Unless one can overmaster another, there is no footing for a stable rank order of cultural groups, even if there is competition and ethnocentrism among them. When there is a peculiarly broad power spread between viing and ethnocentric groups, the emergent stratification system is likely to be rather lasting. Power strains more power and one time established, the dominant group uses its power to blockade the competition of other groups and to solidify laterality. In the terminal, differential power among the assorted groups is the most critical of the demands for the outgrowth of cultural stratification. Noel? s theory postulates that competition for scarce resources provides the motive for stratification, ethnocentrism channels this competition along cultural lines, and differential power determines whether one group will be able to subordinate others. 32d