Chapter one

transcript

leisure opportunities s/he avails, thehealth access s/he has, i.e. her/hislifestyle in general. As in the case ofsocial structure, social stratificationconstrains individual action.

One of the central concerns of thesociological perspective has been tounderstand the dialectical relationshipbetween the individual and society. Youwill recall C.Wright Mill’s elaboration ofthe sociological imagination that seeksto unfold the interplay between anindividual’s biography and society’shistory. It is towards understandingthis dialectical relationship between thesociety and individual that we need todiscuss the three central concepts ofstructure, stratification and socialprocesses in this chapter. In the nextfew chapters we then move on to howsocial structure in rural and urbansocieties are different, to broaderrelationships between environment andsociety. In the last two chapters we lookat western social thinkers and Indiansociologists and their writings thatwould help us further understand theideas of social structure, stratificationas well as social processes.

CHAPTER 1

SOCIAL STRUCTURE, STRATIFICATION AND SOCIAL

PROCESSES IN SOCIETY

INTRODUCTION

You will recall that the earlier bookIntroducing Sociology (NCERT, 2006)had begun with a discussion on therelationship between personalproblems and social issues. We alsosaw how individuals are located withincollectivities such as groups, classes,gender, castes and tribes. Indeed eachof you, is a member of not just onekind of collectivity, but manyoverlapping ones. For instance, you area member of your own peer group, yourfamily and kin, your class and gender,your country and region. Eachindividual thus has a specific locationin the social structure and socialstratification system (see pages 28-35in Introducing Sociology). This alsoimplies that they have different levelsand types of access to social resources.In other words the choices anindividual has in life in terms of theschool s/he goes to — or if s/he goesto school at all — would depend onthe social stratum that s/he belongsto. Likewise with the clothes s/he getsto wear, the food s/he consumes, the

2 UNDERSTANDING SOCIETY

regularities that the concept of socialstructure refers. Upto a point, it ishelpful to think of the structuralcharacteristics of societies asresembling the structure of a building.A building has walls, a floor and a roof,which together give it a particular‘shape’ or form (Giddens 2004: 667).

But the metaphor can be a verymisleading one if applied too strictly.Social structures are made up ofhuman actions and relationships.What gives these their patterning istheir repetition across periods of timeand distances of space. Thus, the ideasof social reproduction and socialstructure are very closely related to oneanother in sociological analysis. Forexample, consider a school and afamily structure. In a school certainways of behaving are repeated over theyears and become institutions. Forinstance admission procedures, codesof conduct, annual functions, dailyassemblies and in some cases evenschool anthems. Likewise in familiescertain ways of behaving, marriagepractices, notions of relationships,duties and expectations are set. Evenas old members of the family or schoolmay pass away and new membersenter, the institution goes on. Yet wealso know that changes do take placewithin the family and in schools.

The above discussion and activityshould help us understand humansocieties as buildings that are at everymoment being reconstructed by thevery bricks that compose them. For aswe saw for ourselves human beings inschools or families do bring changes

The central question that thischapter seeks to discuss is to whatextent the individual constrained by,and to what extent s/he is free of, thesocial structure? To what extent doesone’s position in society or location inthe stratification system governindividual choice? Do social structureand social stratification influence themanner people act? Do they shape theway individuals cooperate, competeand conflict with each other?

In this chapter we deal briefly withthe terms social structure and socialstratification. You have alreadydiscussed social stratification in somedetail in Chapter 2 of the earlier bookIntroducing Sociology (NCERT, 2006).We then move on to focus on threesocial processes namely; cooperation,competition and conflict. In dealingwith each of these processes we shalltry and see how social structure andstratification impinge themselves onthe social processes. In other wordshow individuals and groups cooperate,compete and conflict depending upontheir position within the socialstructure and stratification system.

SOCIAL STRUCTURE AND STRATIFICATION

The term social structure points to thefact that society is structured — i.e.,organised or arranged — in particularways. The social environments inwhich we exist do not just consist ofrandom assortments of events oractions. There are underlyingregularities, or patterns, in how peoplebehave and in the relationships theyhave with one another. It is to these

3SOCIAL STRUCTURE, STRATIFICATION AND SOCIAL PROCESSES IN SOCIETY

Different types of buildings in rural and urban areas

to reproduce the structure even whileintroducing changes. They cooperateat various levels in their everyday livestowards this reproduction. No less trueis the fact that they also compete witheach other, often viciously andruthlessly. The fact remains that alongwith cooperative behaviour we alsowitness serious conflict. And as weshall find later in this chapter,cooperation can be enforced andthereby serve to conceal conflict.

A major theme pursued by EmileDurkheim (and by many othersociological authors since) is that thesocieties exert social constraint overthe actions of their members.Durkheim argued that society hasprimacy over the individual person.Society is far more than the sum ofindividual acts; it has a ‘firmness’ or‘solidity’ comparable to structures inthe material environment.

Think of a person standing in aroom with several doors. The structureof the room constrains the range of his

or her possible activities. The placingof the walls and doors, for exampledefines the routes of exit and entry.Social structure, according toDurkheim, constrains our activities ina parallel way, setting limits to whatwe can do as individuals. It is ‘external’to us just as the walls of the room are.

Other social thinkers like KarlMarx would emphasise the constraintsof social structure but would at thesame time stress human creativity oragency to both reproduce and changesocial structure. Marx argued thathuman beings make history, but notas they wish to or in conditions of theirchoice, but within the constraints andpossibilities of the historical andstructural situation that they are in.

To recall the concept of social strati-fication in Chapter 2 of IntroducingSociology (NCERT, 2006). Socialstratification refers to the existence ofstructured inequalities betweengroups in society, in terms of theiraccess to material or symbolic

Activity 1

Discuss with your grandparents and others of that generation to find out about theways in which families/schools have changed and the ways in which they haveremained the same.Compare descriptions of families in old films/television serials/novels withcontemporary depictions.Can you observe patterns and regularities of social behaviour in your family? Inother words can you describe the structure of your family?Discuss with your teachers how they understand the school as a structure. Dostudents, teachers and the staff have to act in certain ways to maintain or reproducethe structure? Can you think of any changes in either your school or family? Werethese changes resisted? Who resisted them and why?

rewards. While all societies involvesome forms of social stratification,modern societies are often marked bywide differences in wealth and power.While the most evident forms ofstratification in modern societiesinvolve class divisions, others likerace and caste, region andcommunity, tribe and gender alsocontinue to matter as bases of socialstratification.

You will recall that social structureimplied a certain patterning of socialbehaviour. Social stratification as partof the broader social structure is

likewise characterised by a certainpattern of inequality. Inequality is notsomething which is randomlydistributed between individuals insociety. It is systematically linked tomembership in different kinds of socialgroups. Members of a given group willhave features in common, and if theyare in a superior position they willusually see to it that their privilegedposition is passed on to their children.The concept of stratification, then,refers to the idea that society is dividedinto a patterned structure of unequalgroups, and usually implies that thisstructure tends to persist acrossgenerations (Jayaram 1987:22).

It is necessary to distinguishbetween different advantages whichcan be distributed unequally. Thereare three basic forms of advantagewhich privileged groups may enjoy:

(i) Life Chances: All those materialadvantages which improve thequality of life of the recipient — this

This point of view is expressed by Durkheim in his famous statement: When Iperform my duties as a brother, a husband or a citizen and carry out thecommitments I have entered into, I fulfil my obligations which are defined in lawand custom and which are external to myself and my actions…Similarly, the believerhas discovered from birth, ready fashioned, the beliefs and practices of his religiouslife; if they existed before he did, it follows that they exist outside him. The systemsof signs that I employ to express my thoughts, the monetary system I use to paymy debts, the credit instruments I utilise in my commercial relationships, thepractices I follow in my profession, etc. all function independently of the use Imake of them. Considering in turn each member of society, the following remarkscould be made for every single one of them.Source: Durkheim Emile, 1933, The Division of Labour in Society, pp.50-1, A FreePress Paperback, The MacMillan Company, New York).

Activity 2

Think of examples that reveal bothhow human beings are constrained bysocial structure and also of exampleswhere individuals defy social structureand transform it. Recall ourdiscussion on socialisation inIntroducing Sociology (pages 78-79 ).

may include not only economicadvantages of wealth and income,but also benefits such as health,job security and recreation.

(ii) Social Status: Prestige or highstanding in the eyes of othermembers of the society.

(iii) Political Influence: The ability of onegroup to dominate others, or tohave preponderant influence overdecision-making, or to benefitadvantageously from decisions.

The above discussion on the threesocial processes will repeatedly drawattention to the manner that differentbases of social stratification likegender or class constrain socialprocesses. The opportunities andresources available to individuals andgroups to engage in competition,cooperation or conflict are shaped bysocial structure and socialstratification. At the same time,humans do act to modify the structureand system of stratification that exists.

TWO WAYS OF UNDERSTANDING SOCIAL

PROCESSES IN SOCIOLOGY

In the earlier book IntroducingSociology (NCERT, 2006) you haveseen the limitations of common senseknowledge. The problem is not thatcommonsense knowledge isnecessarily false, but that it isunexamined and taken for granted. Bycontrast, the sociological perspectivequestions everything and acceptsnothing as a given. It would thereforenot rest content with an explanationwhich suggests that humans compete

or cooperate or conflict as the case maybe because it is human nature to doso. The assumption behind suchexplanations is that there is somethingintrinsic and universal in humannature that accounts for theseprocesses. However, as we have seenearlier, sociology is not satisfied witheither psychological or naturalistexplanations (see pages 7-8 ofIntroducing Sociology. Sociology seeksto explain these processes ofcooperation, competition and conflictin terms of the actual social structureof society.

Activity 3

Think of examples of cooperation,competition and conflict in youreveryday life

In Introducing Sociology wediscussed how there are differences andplural understandings of society (pages24-25, 36). We saw how functionalistand conflict perspectives varied in theirunderstanding of different institutions,be it the family, the economy or socialstratification and social control. Notsurprisingly therefore, these twoperspectives seek to understand theseprocesses a bit differently. But both KarlMarx (usually associated with a conflictperspective) and Emile Durkheim(usually identified with a functionalistperspective) presume that humanbeings have to cooperate to meet theirbasic needs, and to produce andreproduce themselves and their world.

The conflict perspective emphasiseshow these forms of cooperation

Different types of processes

refer to the fulfilment of the broadestconditions which are necessary for asystem’s existence (and whichtherefore keep it alive and prevent itsdestruction) such as:

(i) The socialisation of new members;

(ii) A shared system of communication;

(iii) Methods of assigning individualsto roles.

You are well aware how thefunctionalist perspective rests upon theassumption that different parts ororgans of society have a function or roleto play for the broader maintenanceand functioning of the whole society.Seen from this perspective, cooperation,competition and conflict can be seenas universal features of all societies,explained as the result of the inevitableinteractions among humans living insociety and pursuing their ends. Sincethe focus is on system sustenance,

changed from one historical society toanother. For instance, it wouldrecognise that in simple societieswhere no surplus was produced, therewas cooperation between individualsand groups who were not divided onclass or caste or race lines. But insocieties where surplus is produced —whether feudal or capitalist — thedominant class appropriates thesurplus and cooperation wouldnecessarily involve potential conflictand competition. The conflict view thusemphasises that groups andindividuals are placed differentiallyand unequally within the system ofproduction relations. Thus, the factoryowner and the factory worker docooperate in their everyday work. Buta certain conflict of interests woulddefine their relationship.

The understanding that informs theconflict perspective is that in societiesdivided by caste, or class or patriarchy,some groups are disadvantaged anddiscriminated against. Furthermore thedominant groups sustain this unequalorder by a series of cultural norms, andoften coercion or even violence. As youwill see in the next paragraphs, it isnot that the functionalist perspectivefails to appreciate the role of suchnorms or sanctions. But it understandstheir function in terms of the societyas a whole, and not in terms of thedominant sections who control society.

The functionalist perspective ismainly concerned with the ‘systemrequirements’ of society — certainfunctional imperatives, functionalrequisites and prerequisites. These

Babul Mora. Naihar Chuto hi jaiFears of the Natal home is left behind

Babul ki dua-ein leti jaJa tujhko sukhi sansar mileMaike ki kabhi na yaad aayeSasural me itna pyar mileTake your father’s blessings/prayeras you go;Go, and (may you) get a happyhousehold;May you never be reminded of yourmother’s home;(Because of) all the love you receiveAt your in-laws’ place. (Basu 2001: 128)

Activity 4

Discuss whether women are cooperating, or refusing to engage in conflict orcompetition because of a range of normative compulsions. Are they cooperatingwith the given norm of male inheritance because of the fear of losing the affectionof their brothers if they behave otherwise? The song in the box below is specific toa region, but evokes the more general fears of natal abandonment for women in apatrilineal society.

Bride leaving for groom’s house in a ‘Doli’

competition and conflict is looked atwith the understanding that in mostcases they tend to get resolved withouttoo much distress, and that they mayeven help society in various ways.

Sociological studies have alsoshown how norms and patterns ofsocialisation often ensure that aparticular social order persists, eventhough it is skewed in the interests ofone section. In other words therelationship between cooperation,competition and conflict is often complexand not easily separable.

In order to understand howcooperation may entail conflict, and thedifference between ‘enforced’ and‘voluntary’ cooperation, let us look at

the very contentious issue of women’sright to property in their natal family.A study was conducted among differentsections of society to understand theattitude towards taking natal property(see pages 41- 46 of IntroducingSociology). A significant number ofwomen (41.7 per cent) evoked thetheme of a daughter’s love and love fora daughter when speaking about theirrights to property. But they emphasisedapprehension rather than affection bysaying they would not claim full or anyshare of natal property because theywere afraid this would sour relationswith their brothers or cause theirbrothers’ wives to hate them, and thatas a result they would no longer be

welcome in their natal homes. Thisattitude represents one of the dominantmetaphors mediating women’s refusalof property… A woman demanding hershare is the greedy shrew or ‘hak lenewali’. There was also a close connectionbetween these feelings and theapparently obverse ones of the desireto continue to be part of the natal familyby actively contributing to its prosperityor being available to deal with its crises.

Activity 2 would enable you toappreciate how apparently cooperativebehaviour can also be seen as aproduct of deep conflicts in society. Butwhen these conflicts are not expressedopenly or challenged, the impressionremains that there is no conflict, butonly cooperation. A functionalist viewoften uses the term accommodation toexplain situations such as the onedescribed above, where women wouldprefer not to claim property rights intheir natal home. It would be seen asan effort to compromise and co-existdespite conflict.

Activity 5

Think of other kinds of socialbehaviour which may appear as co-operative but may conceal deeperconflicts of society.

COOPERATION AND DIVISION OF LABOUR

The idea of cooperation rests on certainassumptions about human behaviour.It is argued that without humancooperation it would be difficult forhuman life to survive. Further it isargued that even in the animal world

we witness cooperation, whether theybe ants or bees or mammals.Comparison with the animal worldshould however be done carefully. Welook at two very different theoreticaltraditions in sociology to illustrate thepoint, those represented by EmileDurkheim and Karl Marx.

Sociology for the most part did notagree with the assumption that humannature is necessarily nasty andbrutish. Emile Durkheim arguesagainst a vision of “primitive humanitywhose hunger and thirst, always badlysatisfied, were their only passions”.Instead he argued:

They overlook the essential elementof moral life, that is, the moderatinginfluence that society exercises overits members, which tempers andneutralises the brutal action of thestruggle for existence and selection.Wherever there are societies, thereis altruism, because there issolidarity. Thus, we find altruismfrom the beginning of humanity andeven in truly intemperate form.(Durkheim 1933)

For Durkheim solidarity, the moralforce of society, is fundamental for ourunderstanding of cooperation andthereby the functioning of society. Therole of division of labour — whichimplies cooperation — is precisely tofulfill certain needs of society. Thedivision of labour is at the same timea law of nature and also a moral ruleof human conduct.

Durkheim distinguished betweenmechanical and organic solidarity that

characterised pre-industrial andcomplex industrial societies respectively.Both are forms of cooperation insociety. Mechanical solidarity is theform of cohesion that is basedfundamentally on sameness. Most ofthe members of such societies live verysimilar lives, with little specialisationor division of labour beyond thatassociated with age and sex. Membersfeel bonded together essentially bytheir shared beliefs and sentiments,their common conscience andconsciousness. Organic solidarity isthat form of social cohesion that isbased on division of labour and theresulting interdependence of membersof society. As people become morespecialised, they also become moredependent upon each other. A familyengaged in subsistence farming maysurvive with little or no help fromsimilar homesteaders. But specialisedworkers in a garment or a carmanufacturing factory cannot survivewithout a host of other specialisedworkers supplying their basic needs.

Karl Marx too distinguishes humanlife from animal life. While Durkheimemphasised altruism and solidarity asdistinctive of the human world, Marxemphasised consciousness. He writes:

Men can be distinguished fromanimals by consciousness, by religionor anything else you like. Theythemselves begin to distinguishthemselves from animals as soon asthey begin to produce their means ofsubsistence, a step which isconditioned by their physicalorganisation. By producing their

means of subsistence men areindirectly producing their material life(Marx 1972:37).

The above quote from Marx mayappear difficult but will help usunderstand how cooperation inhuman life is dif ferent fromcooperation in animal life. For humansnot only adjust and accommodate tocooperate but also alter society in thatprocess. For example, men and womenover the ages had to adjust to naturalconstraints. Various technologicalinnovations over time not onlytransformed human life but in somesense nature too. Humans incooperating thus do not passivelyadjust and accommodate but alsochange the natural or social world towhich they adjust. We had discussedin the Chapter on Culture andSocialisation in earlier book,Introducing Sociology how Indians hadto adjust and accommodate and co-operate with the English languagebecause of our experience with Britishcolonialism. But also how in thatprocess Hinglish has emerged as aliving social entity (page 72).

While both Durkheim from afunctionalist view and Marx from aconflict perspective emphasisecooperation, they also differ. For Marxcooperation is not voluntary in asociety where class exists. He argues,“The social power, i.e., the multipliedproductive force, which arises throughthe cooperation of different individualsas it is caused by the division of labour,appears to these individuals, sincetheir cooperation is not voluntary but

has come about naturally, not as theirown united power, but as an alien forceexisting outside them…” (Marx 1972:53). Marx used the term alienation torefer to the loss of control on the partof workers over the concrete contentof labour, and over the products oftheir labour. In other words, workerslose control over how to organise theirown work; and they lose control overthe fruits of their labour. Contrast, forexample, the feeling of fulfillment andcreativity of a weaver or potter orironsmith with that of a workerinvolved in a factory whose sole taskmay be to pull a lever or press a buttonthroughout the day. Cooperation insuch a situation would be enforced.

COMPETITION AS AN IDEA AND PRACTICE

As in the case of cooperation,discussions on the concept ofcompetition often proceed with the ideathat competition is universal andnatural. But going back to ourdiscussion on how sociologicalexplanation is dif ferent fromnaturalistic ones, it is important tounderstand competition as a socialentity that emerges and becomesdominant in society at a particularhistorical point of time. In thecontemporary period it is apredominant idea and often we find itdifficult to think that there can be anysociety where competition is not aguiding force.

An anecdote of a school teacher whorecounted her experience with childrenin a remote area in Africa draws

attention to the fact that competitionitself has to be explained sociologicallyand not as a natural phenomena. Theanecdote refers to the teacher’sassumption that the children willnaturally rejoice at the idea of acompetitive race where the winnerwould get a chocolate as a prize. To hersurprise, her suggestion not only didnot evoke any enthusiasm but insteadseemed to cause considerable anxietyand distress. On probing further theyexpresses their distaste for a gamewhere there would be ‘winners’ and‘losers’. This went against their idea offun, which meant for them a necessarilycooperative and collective experience,and not a competitive one where therewards necessarily exclude some andreward one or few.

In the contemporary worldhowever competition is the dominantnorm and practice. Classicalsociological thinkers such as EmileDurkheim and Karl Marx have notedthe growth of individualism andcompetition respectively in modernsocieties. Both developments areintrinsic to the way modern capitalistsociety functions. The stress is ongreater efficiency and greater profitmaximisation. The underlyingassumptions of capitalism are:

(i) expansion of trade;(ii) division of labour;(iii) specialisation; and(iv) hence rising productivity.

And these processes of self-sustaining growth are fuelled by the

central theme of capitalism: rationalindividuals in free competition in themarketplace, each striving tomaximise profits.

The ideology of competition is thedominant ideology in capitalism. Thelogic of this ideology is that the marketoperates in a manner that ensuresgreatest efficiency. For examplecompetition ensures that the mostefficient firm survives. Competitionensures that the students with highermarks or best studies get admissioninto prestigious colleges. And then getthe best jobs. In all cases the “best”refers to that which ensures thegreatest material rewards.

Activity 6

India has recently witnessed intensedebates on the government’s decisionto ensure 27 per cent reservation forOBCs. Collect the dif ferentarguments for and against thisproposal that have been put forwardin newspapers, magazines andtelevision programmes.

Collect information about thedrop-out rate in schools, and primaryschools in particular (see pages 57-59 in the earlier book)

Given that mostly lower castestudents drop-out of school, andmost higher educational institutionsare dominated by the upper castes,discuss the concepts of cooperation,competition and conflict in theabove context.

Views that humans naturally liketo compete has to be understood

critically like all other naturalistexplanations (see page 8 of earlierbook). Competition as a desirable valueflourished with the onset of capitalism.Read the extracts in the box anddiscuss.

Competition, and the whole laissez-faire economy of 19th centurycapitalism, may have been importantin promoting economic growth. Theexceptionally rapid development of theAmerican economy may beattributable to the greater scope ofcompetition in the United States. Butstill we cannot produce any exactcorrelations between the extent ofcompetition, or the intensity of thecompetitive spirit, and the rate ofeconomic growth in different societies.And on the other hand, there aregrounds for supposing thatcompetition has other less welcomeeffects (Bottomore 1975: 174-5).

Liberals like J.S. Mill felt that theeffects of competition were generallyharmful. However, he felt that thoughmodern competition ‘is described asthe fight of all against all, but at thesame time it is the fight for all’; this inthe sense that economic competitionis directed toward maximum outputat minimum cost. Furthermore, ‘giventhe breadth and individualism ofsociety, many kinds of interest, whicheventually hold the group togetherthroughout its members, seem tocome alive and stay alive only whenthe urgency and requirements of thecompetitive struggle force them uponthe individual.’

Activity 7

Organise a debate for and against theidea that competition is a necessarygood in society and is a must fordevelopment. Draw upon schoolexperience to write an essay on themanner that competition impacts ondifferent students.

This ideology assumes thatindividuals compete on an equal basis,i.e. that all individuals are positionedequally in the competition foreducation, jobs, or resources. But asthe earlier discussions on stratificationor inequality showed, individuals areplaced differentially in society. If thegreater number of children in India donot go to school or drop-out soonerrather than later, then they remain outof the competition entirely.

Activity 8

Identify different occasions whenindividuals have to compete in oursociety. Begin with admission toschool onwards through the differentstages of life.

CONFLICT AND COOPERATION

The term conflict implies clash ofinterests. We have already seen howconflict theorists believe that scarcityof resources in society producesconflict as groups struggle to gainaccess to and control over thoseresources. The bases of conflict vary.It could be class or caste, tribe orgender, ethnicity or religiouscommunity. As young students you

are well aware of the range of conflictsthat exist in society. The scale andnature of different conflicts that occurare however different.

Activity 9

Think of the dif ferent kinds ofconflicts that exist in the world today.At the widest level there are conflictsbetween nations and blocs of nations.Many kinds of conflicts also existwithin nations. Make a list of themand then discuss in what ways theyare similar and in what waysdifferent.

A widely held commonsenseperception is that conflicts in societyare new. Sociologists have drawnattention to the fact that conflictschange in nature and form at differentstages of social development. Butconflicts have always been part of anysociety. Social change and greaterassertion of democratic rights bydisadvantaged and discriminatedgroups make the conflict more visible.But this does not mean that the causesfor conflict did not exist earlier. Thequote in the box emphasises this.

Developing countries are todayarenas for conflict between the oldand the new. The old order is nolonger able to meet the new forces,nor the new wants and aspirationsof the people, but neither is itmoribund — in fact, it is still verymuch alive. The conflict producesmuch unseemly argument, discord,confusion, and on occasion, even

bloodshed. Under the circumstances,it is tempting for the sociologist tolook to the good old peaceful days insheer nostalgia. But a moment’sreflection should convince him thatthe old order was not conflict-free andthat it perpetrated inhuman crueltieson vast sections of the population. Atheoretical approach that regardsconflict as abnormal, or that investsequilibrium with a special value in thename of science, can be a handicapin studying developing societies.

Source: Srinivas, M.N., 1972, SocialChange in Modern India, pp.159-160Orient Longman, New Delhi.

It is also important to understandthat conflict appears as a discord orovert clash only when it is openly ex-pressed. For example, the existence ofa peasant movement is an overt ex-pression of a deep rooted conflict overland resources. But the absence of amovement does not imply the absenceof a conflict. Hence, this chapter hasemphasised the relationship betweenconflict, involuntary cooperation andalso resistance.

Let us examine some of theconflicts that exist in society, and alsothe close relationship that existsbetween competition, cooperation andconflict. We just take two instanceshere. The first is the family andhousehold. The second, is that of landbased conflict.

Traditionally the family andhousehold were often seen asharmonious units where cooperationwas the dominant process andaltruism the driving principle of

human behaviour. The last threedecades have seen a great deal ofquestioning of this assumption byfeminist analysis. Scholars such asAmartya Sen have noted the possibilityof enforced cooperation.

Not only do the different parties havemuch to gain from cooperation; theirindividual activities have to take theform of being overtly cooperative, evenwhen substantial conflicts exist…Although serious conflicts of interestsmay be involved in the choice of ‘socialtechnology’, the nature of the familyorganisation requires that theseconflicts be moulded in a generalformat of cooperation, with conflictstreated as aberrations or deviantbehaviour (Sen 1990:147).

Since, conflict is often not overtlyexpressed, it has been found thatsubaltern or subordinate sections,whether women in households orpeasants in agrarian societies, developdifferent strategies to cope with conflictand ensure cooperation. Findings ofmany sociological studies seem tosuggest that covert conflict and overtcooperation is common. The extractbelow draws from many studies onwomen’s behaviour and interactionwithin households.

Material pressures and incentives tocooperate extend to distributionand there is little evidence of overtconflict over distributional processes.Instead there is a hierarchy ofdecision-making, needs and priorities(associated with age, gender andlifecycle), a hierarchy to which bothmen and women appear to subscribe.

Thus, women appear to acquiesce to— and indeed actively perpetuate —discriminatory practices in intra-household distribution in order toassure their own longer -termsecurity. Denied access to extra-household relationships andresources, it is in their materialinterests to subscribe to the generalson-preference which characterisesthis culture, and they invest in a greatdeal of ‘selfless’ devotion in order towin their sons as allies and insuranceagainst an uncertain future.‘Maternal altruism’ in the northernIndian plain is likely to be biasedtowards sons and can be seen aswomen’s response to patriarchal risk.Women are not entirely powerless, ofcourse, but their subversion of maledecision-making power tends to becovert. The use of trusted allies(relatives or neighbours) to conductsmall businesses on their behalf, thesecret lending and borrowing ofmoney, and negotiations around themeaning of gender ideologies ofpurdah and motherhood, are some of

Land Conflicts

Harbaksh, a Rajput had borrowed Rs100 from Nathu Ahir (Patel) in the year 1956,by mortaging (informally) 2 acres of land. In the same year Harbaksh died andGanpat, his successor, claimed the land back in 1958 and he offered Rs 200.Nathu refused to return the land to Ganpat. Ganpat could not take to legalproceedings as this exchange was not codified in the revenue records. Under thecircumstances Ganpat had resorted to violence and forcefully cultivated the landin 1959 (one year after Gramdan). Ganpat, being a police constable, could influencethe police officials. When the Patel went to Phulera (the police thana headquarters)he was taken to the police station and was forced to agree that he will give the landback to Ganpat. Later a meeting of the villagers was convened when the moneywas given to Patel and Ganpat received the land back.Source: Oommen, T.K., 1972: Charisma, Stability and Change; An Analysis ofBhoodan-Gramdan Movement in India, p.84. Thompson Press, New Delhi.

the strategies by which women haveresisted male power (Abdullah andZeidenstein, 1982; White, 1992). Thattheir resistance takes thisclandestine form reflects their lack ofoptions outside householdcooperation and the concomitanthigh risks associated with openconflict (Kabeer 1996:129).

In keeping with the sociologicaltradition of questioning taken forgranted commonsense assumptions,this chapter has critically examined theprocesses of cooperation, competitionand conflict. The sociological approachdoes not see these processes as‘natural’. It further relates them to othersocial developments. In the followingparagraphs you will read from asociological study done on landrelations and the Bhoodan-Gramdanmovement in India. Read box and seehow cooperation in society can besociologically related to technology andthe economic arrangements ofproduction.

Activity 10

Read the following account of landconflict. Identify the different socialgroups within it and notice the roleof power and access to resources.

Conclusion

The ef fort in this chapter is tounderstand the relationship betweenstructure and stratification on theone hand and the social processes ofcooperation, competition and conflicton the other. You would have noticed

that the three social processes aredifferent, yet they often co-exist,overlap and sometimes exist in aconcealed fashion, as evident in theabove discussion about forcedcooperation. We end with twoactivities that report real life eventsthat help you to use your sociologicalunderstanding to explore the mannerin which the three processes operatefor social groups that aredifferentially located in the socialstructure and the stratificationsystem.

Activity 11

Read the report carefully and discuss the relationship between social structure,stratification and social processes. Describe how the characters Santosh and Pushpaare constrained by the social structure and stratification system. Is it possible toidentify the three social processes of cooperation, competition and conflict in theirlives? Can these marriages be seen as processes of cooperation? Can these marriagesbe seen as actions that people consciously adopt in order to survive in the competitivejob market since married couples are preferred? Is there any sign of conflict?

Outlook 8 May 2006

“Meet the Parents: Teen marriages, migrant labour and cane factories in crisis.A vicious cycle.”

The advent of technology had also reduced the necessity for cooperation. Forinstance, for the operation of a Charas, an indigenous device of well irrigation, onerequires 2 pairs of bullocks and four men. An ordinary peasant cannot afford thecost of four bullocks or an average household may not have the required manpower.In such situations they resort to borrowing bullocks and men from other households(kin, neighbours, friends, etc.) assuring similar services in return. But if a Charasis replaced by a Rehat (persian wheel) for irrigation which calls for a heavier capitalinvestment, one needs only one pair of bullocks and one person for its operation.The necessity of cooperation in the context of irrigation is reduced by a heavier capitalinvestment and an efficient technology. Thus, the level of technology in a systemmay determine the need for cooperation between men and groups.Source: Oommen, T.K., 1972, Charisma, Stability and Change; An Analysis ofBhoodan-Gramdan Movement in India, p.88. Thompson Press, New Delhi.

It is the same old story, only with a few twists. Santosh Shinde, 14, son of landlesslabourers who take a loan of Rs 8,000 to educate him. Now the moneylender wantsthe loan to be repaid, so the cash strapped Shindes take a salary advance from theonly man offering jobs around town, a sugarcane factory contractor. Problem isthat they are just a husband, a wife and gawky boy. So the Shindes hurriedly finda bride for Santosh: another 14 year old, Pushpa, who accompanies them fromtheir village in Maharashtra’s Osmanabad district to Karnataka. They stop en routefor a no-frills marriage at a temple.…There’s even a name for it, ‘gatekin’. It probably comes from the makeshift campsthese migrant labourers set up outside the factory gates in the cane-cutting season.Contractors prefer married couples to single boys as they are more likely to stay onat the factories for months.…With western Maharashtra’s cane factories — which once produced nearly a thirdof India’s sugar output — in a state of crisis, jobs for migrant labourers have dried up.Some estimates say the factories have accumulated losses of over Rs 1,900 crore, andthis year 120 of the 177 sugar factories were forced to avail of the Centre’s Rs. 1,650crore bailout package. But the trickle down has been harsher on the migrant labour,out in the fields cutting cane feverishly during the six-month-long season. Their chancesof landing jobs have become harder, and wages have plummeted.… Gangly Santosh, now 16 and sporting a straggly moustache, has just finished hisX exams while wife Pushpa took her XII exams. Pushpa, a good student, balancesher academic ambitions with caring for a one-and-a-half-year-old son. Then there’shome and labour in the fields. As she says, “My marriage was so quick, I wondersometimes — when did I get married — when did all this happen?” Asked if herhealth has suffered, the young mother says “I try not to think about things I can’tcontrol. Instead I focus on what I can do now.” Her in-laws have said she can studyfurther only if she gets a scholarship. Otherwise, the young couple will migrate toMumbai to work at a construction site.

Activity 12

Read the report carefully and contrast the competition that Vikram and Nitin facewith that of Santosh and Pushpa in Activity 11.

The Week (7 May 2006) carried a special feature titled “The New Workaholics:Their Goals, Money, Risks Health”.

As the Indian economy gallops at 8 per cent, firing on all cylinders, thousandsof jobs are being created in every sphere of business resulting in changing attitudesand work styles. Young professionals want rewards instantly. Promotions must comefast and quick. And money — exceptional salaries, perks and big increments — theprime motivator, makes the world go round. Vikram Samant, 27, who recently joineda BPO, makes no bones about quitting his last job for a better salary. “Money isimportant but my new employers are fully aware that I’m worth every rupee paid tome,” he reasons.

…What is also driving young workaholics is the need to sprint up the corporate ladderrather than climb each rung at a measured pace. “Yes, I want the next designationquickly, not when I am starting to go bald,” says Nitin, who refused to wait aroundfor the next big jump and hopped from ICICI to Standard Chartered with a promotionand then to Optimix as zonal manager (emphasis original).

GLOSSARY

Altruism: The principle of acting to benefit others without any selfishness orself-interest.

Alienation: Marx used the term to refer to the loss of control on the part of workersover the nature of the labour task, and over the products of their labour.

Anomie: For Durkheim, a social condition where the norms guiding conduct breakdown, leaving individuals without social restraint or guidance.

Capitalism: An economic system in which the means of production are privatelyowned and organised to accumulate profits within a market framework, in whichlabour is provided by waged workers.

Division of Labour: The specialisation of work tasks, by means of which differentoccupations are combined within a production system. All societies have atleast some rudimentary form of division of labour especially between the tasksallocated to men and those performed by women. With the development ofindustrialism, however, the division of labour became more complex than inany prior type of production system. In the modern world, the division of labouris international in scope.

Dominant Ideology: Shared ideas or beliefs which serve to justify the interests ofdominant groups. Such ideologies are found in all societies in which they aresystematic and engrained inequalities between groups. The concept of ideologyconnects closely with that of power, since ideological systems serve to legitimisethe differential power which groups hold.

Individualism: Doctrines or ways of thinking that focus on the autonomousindividual, rather than on the group.

Laissez-faire Liberalism: A political and economic approach based on the generalprinciple of non-interference in the economy by government and freedom for marketsand property owners.

Mechanical Solidarity: According to Durkheim, traditional cultures with a lowdivision of labour are characterised by mechanical solidarity. Because most membersof the society are involved in similar occupations, they are bound together bycommon experience and shared beliefs.

Modernity: A term designed to encapsulate the distinctiveness, complexity anddynamism of social processes unleashed during the 18th and 19th centuries whichmark a distinct break from traditional ways of living.

Organic Solidarity: According to Durkheim, societies characterised by organicsolidarity are held together by people’s economic interdependence and a recognitionof the importance of others’ contributions. As the division of labour becomes morecomplex, people become more and more dependent on one another, because eachperson needs goods and services that those in other occupations supply.Relationships of economic reciprocity and mutual dependency come to replaceshared beliefs in creating social consensus.

Social Constraint: A term referring to the fact that the groups and societies ofwhich we are a part exert a conditioning influence on our behaviour. Social constraintwas regarded by Durkheim as one of the distinctive properties of ‘social facts’.

Structures: Refers generally to constructed frameworks and patterns oforganisation, which in some way constrain or direct human behaviour.

EXERCISES

1. Discuss the different tasks that demand cooperation with reference toagricultural or industrial operations.

2. Is cooperation always voluntary or is it enforced? If enforced, is it sanctions oris the strength of norms that ensure cooperation? Discuss with examples.

3. Can you find illustrative examples of conflict drawn from Indian society?Discuss the causes that led to conflict in each instance.

4. Write an essay based on examples to show how conflicts get resolved.

5. Imagine a society where there is no competition. Is it possible? If not,why not?

6. Talk to your parents and elders, grandparents and their contemporaries anddiscuss whether modern society is really more competitive or conflict riddenthan it used to be before. And if you think it is, how would you explain thissociologically?

REFERENCES

ABDULLAH, T. and S. ZEIDENSTEIN. 1982. Village Men of Bangladesh: Prospects forChange. Pergamon Press, Oxford.

BASU SRIMATI. 2001. She Comes to Take Her Rights: Indian Women, Property andPropriety. Kali for Women, New Delhi.

BOTTOMORE, T.B. 1975. Sociology as Social Criticism. George Allen and UnwinLtd., London

DURKHEIM EMILE. 1933. The Division of Labour in Society. A Free Press (Paperback),The MacMillan Company, New York.

JAYARAM, N. 1987. Introductory Sociology. MacMillan India Ltd, Delhi.

HALE SYLVIA, M. 1990. Controversies in Sociology: A Canadian Introduction. LongmanGroups, London.

MARX KARL and FREDERICK ENGELS. 1974. The German Ideology. Selected Works,Vol. 1. Peoples Publishing House, Moscow.

SEN AMARTYA. 1990. “Gender and Cooperative Conflicts” in Persistent Inequalities(ed) II.Tinker, pp.123-49. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

SINGH YOGENDRA. 1973. Modernization of Indian Tradition. Thomson Press, Delhi.

SRINIVAS, M.N. 1972. Social Change in Modern India. Orient Longman, New Delhi.

OOMMEN, T.K. 1972. Charisma, Stability and Change; An Analysis of Bhoodan-Gramdan Movement in India. Thomson Press, New Delhi.

WHITE, S.C. 1992. Arguing With the Crocodile, Gender and Class in Bangladesh,Zed Books, London.

Chapter one

Entertainment & Humor