1.

It is argued that the process of socialization plays a relevant role in the creation and
reinforcement of social inequalities. Develop this concept further and describe how such
processes of socialization take place in relation to one specific form of inequality (you may
elaborate on a form described in Chapter 6, such as gender, race, or class, or make use of
your own idea). Use examples from other sources, or your own life experiences. Include in
your essay what you see as the biggest challenges in confronting the socialization processes
that lead to the form of inequality you have described.

Socialization processes have been a source of debate since the conception of the discipline
of sociology and, although four major philosophies have asserted themselves as predominant,
controversy endures on whether “socialization” represents a normative term or otherwise. In order
to determine whether social processes play a significant role in the creation and reinforcement of
social inequalities one must first determine from which perspective, or under which theory, such
question is analysed. Such will not be done in a categorized manner, but as the philosophical
development of the argument will permit throughout this text.
To begin decompiling the aspects of such question one must first gain a perception of
sociology similar to that Comte had, one in which all other fields of sciences would intersect1. If
one adheres to this ideal, the economic sciences must be considered one of the largest contributors
to sociological phenomena as it is engrained within the fabric of our human historical and societal
development since the invention of writing.
The invention of writing itself arose out of economic necessity in the ancient realms of Indus
river valley and Mesopotamia initially with a system of tokens used to represent commodities and
units of labour. Such system eventually developed in the cuneiform language, initially only as a
system of logograms and in time with each cuneiform marking representing phonetic elements of
spoken Sumerian2. In time, the predominant economic system, still prevailing today despite its
evident flaws and tendency to fall into cycles of increasingly severe instability, has become one
based on capital and currency – Capitalism. It is so deeply entrenched in our vision of society that
any alternative system has been systematically fought with the intent of reason of fear, and the
intent of prevalence and domination.
Capitalism is am economic doctrine which can be summarized into being the relationship
between the four determinant factors of production: labour, land, capital and enterprise. The
interactions between these factors are multi-fold but, simplistically, it can be said that land and
labour are exploited through capitalist enterprise (based on competition) with the ultimate goal of
accumulation or production of wealth in the form of capital and currency.
Exploitation of labour and land thus become the means through which one can achieve
economic success and thus be considered, to a large extent, also socially successful. This is essential
in understanding the reason for which capitalism is the source of economic and, to a large extent,
social inequalities. The exploitation of other human beings' labour and their enslavement to, and
manufactured dependence on, a system of unfairly rationed capital and currency is the basis for
economic growth. The exploitation of the labour of many for the advantages of the few is the nature
of capitalism. As a matter of fact, slavery is not extraneous to this doctrine as it has been utilized
and condoned for the large majority of its history. With relatively recent historical developments,
slavery has been deemed immortal, constituting a dilemma for the capitalist exploiters as to whom
to exploit at the best possible cost. The answer to this question was the creation of the proletariat
class. Such system of exploitation can only be the source of inequalities in the form of the
concentration of the means of production in the hands of a minority, thus leaving the working
classes deprived of power for economic or social action.
In a capitalist economy, the ultimate goal is to move in in the intrinsic hierarchical structure
from being exploited, to being an exploiter. The proposition that the free market economy
represents the highest paragons of justice and fairness due to its equality of opportunity is simply

1 Global Sociology pp. 21

2Rudgley, Richard (2000). The Lost Civilizations of the Stone Age. New York: Simon & Schuster. pp. 48–57.
delusional. The solidification and almost impermeability of social classes have installed a system
into which those born in a higher segment of the hierarchy have a higher degree of opportunity to
become the exploiters, and a larger pool of capital (means) through which this can be achieved. This
line of thought is particularly relevant when analysing the contributions to sociological studies of
Charles Horton Cooley and developed Jean Baudrillard.

Cooley developed the notion of “the looking-glass self” in which we imaginatively assume
the stance of other people and view ourselves as we believe we are perceived by them. In other
words, we assume the identity based on how we believe that identity was, is, or will be perceived by
our societal context. Cooley called the perception we hold of how other see us “reflective appraisal”
and considered it one of the governing factors of self-esteem alongside social comparisons and self-
attribution. Baudrillard furthers Cooley's notion of a mirror-image in his development of the
concepts of simulacra and simulacrum, mirror images, and hyper-reality. According to Baudrillard,
in a post-modern world the reflected image of a societal aspect (simulacrum) precedes the original
and the distinction between reality and its representation vanish. When the simulacrum prevails
upon all others, originality becomes a totally meaningless concepts3. In accordance with this theory
it is then further extrapolated that in a post-modern society the real and the simulated are no longer
distinguishable. He argues that in our media age, in which the media acts as one of the major
perpetrators of the capitalist model of consumption, images of reality and reality itself interact so
much so that they have become interchangeable.4
When the concepts of Baudrillard and Cooley are merged one can more clearly see the
influence of economic process on those of socialization and how, due to the inherent exploitative of
the prevailing economic system, the former accentuate the inequalities in the latter. The concept of
hyper-reality offered by Baudrillard builds upon the falsity of the constructs upon the current
capitalist society is supposedly built upon, while Cooley provides an explanation of how the self
relates to the context extrapolated by Baudrillard. Similarly, Ervin Goffman developed the notion of
dramaturgical approach to the creation of societal identities based on the assumption that we have a
stake in presenting ourselves to others in way that will lead them to view us in a favourable light.
Paradoxically, in a capitalist economy, to be seen in a favourable light one must exploit the
members of his society; even more paradoxically, those who are able at exploiting are often admired
by the exploited for their ability to do so.
In addition to the dramaturgical approach Ervin Goffman developed the concept of “total
institutions”, places of work and residence where “great number of similarly situated people, cut off
from the wider community for a considerable time, together lead an enclosed, formally
administered round of life”5. The characteristics of total institutions are quite precise and include the
following: “all aspects of life are conducted in the same place under the same authority; the
individual is a member of a large cohort, all treated alike; all daily activities (over a 24-hour period)
are tightly scheduled; there is a sharp split between supervisors and lower participants; information
about the member's fate is withheld”6. Under many of such aspects, one could consider life under a
capitalist system to be that of a Total Institution on a macroscopic scale. We are unable to envision
what is behind this total institution due to our incapability to conceive the development of life on
other planets, let alone civilizations on other planets (or on our own for that matter) who utilize and
survive on different economic structures.

Pertaining to the hierarchical nature of capitalist and the tendency for this aspect to infiltrate
other societal structures, one can easily witness the parallels both within a familial unit as well as in
groups of children (perhaps the most socially receptive individuals of all). The traditional notion of

3 Simulacra and Simulacrum – Jean Baurillard

4Karen Sternheimer - http://nortonbooks.typepad.com/everydaysociology/2009/10/soap-operas-and-postmodern-
theory.html
5 Extracts from Ervin Goffman http://studymore.org.uk/xgof.htm#Asylums
6Goffman, Erving. 1961. Asylums: Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other Inmates.
the family nucleus in industrialized societies (those more closely associated with consumerism and
capitalism), is composed of the father as the “head” of the family often providing the source of
income and thus making final economic decisions, the mother as the manager who coordinates and
rations resource allocation and is directly responsible for the subordinates, in this case the children,
who have no say in how the structure is run and are expected to obey the commands they are given
unconditionally. The societal impulse towards capital affinity begins within the family as well, as
the subordinates are remunerated, with a financial compensation in the form of an allowance or
pocket money, in exchange for appropriate and good behaviour and conformity with the rules of the
family and society.
The same behaviour of hierarchical categorization of social structures can also be witnessed
within children. Those physically more able to exert their will upon others are considered at the top
of such structure, as are those able to acquire bigger, better, and more toys than the other. With
increased societal awareness, violence becomes an undesirable and unacceptable means of
achieving a goal, leaving economic dominance as the only alternative.
Internalization theory, advocated by Talcott Parsons, is especially attune to such a
perspective as it maintains that the process of socialization begins with the internalization of a
cognitive frame of reference for interpersonal relationships as well common system of “expressive
symbolism”. Such expressive symbolism is often the nature of the link made between the
accumulation of capital and currency, and height of societal status.
Utilizing this framework of analysis one can then identify how economic processes are
actually at the root of the large majority of social inequalities whether they be racial, gender,
religion, or class related. Pertaining to gender, for example, it could be argued that the inequalities
suffered by females worldwide are the result of the lack of concentration of economic power within
their hands. With increased economic responsibility and the choice of how such responsibility is
applied, women are able to attain a much higher standard of living and societal equality. Within the
family, the woman is often subordinate to the man due to the lack of her economic power, in turn
generally resulting in a depreciation of the values associated with the female gender, and a
degeneration of attitudes towards it.
A similar situation is found in most racial inequalities within a society. The marginalization
or discrimination of racial and ethnic groups is often related to an economic factor. The hatred for
the Jews in Nazi Germany was partially fuelled by their ability in the financial system and the
consequential fear of concentration of power in their hands. The attacks against Indonesian-Chinese
during the Asian Economic Crisis of the late 90s was due to their ability to thrive economically
despite a decaying financial situation in their societal context. The persistent and systematic
marginalization of African-Americans in the United States is the result of a mental societal
association of the colour of the skin with an economic status, which derives from an economic
factor itself which was the import of slave labour for textile production centuries prior.

When applied to a global sociological scale, one of the most enduring explanations of the
nature of capitalism remains Immanuel Wallernstein's World-system (or World Systems7) theory.
World-system refers to the international division of labour and envisions the world into distinct
“core”, “semi-peripheral” and “peripheral” countries (or areas). The flow or resources often
redistributes them from the underdeveloped (peripheral) countries to the developed and
industrialized core, often under the form of raw-materials and goods. Such is the nature of global
macro-capitalism – the unfair and unjust exploitation of the many for the benefit of the few.

A number of different socio-economic doctrines have been proposed throughout human

history as alternatives to the capitalist totalitarianism found today. One of the most notable of such
visionaries was Karl Marx, who developed the philosophy of Marxist Communism which would
eventually become the foundation of socialism. Despite, as the term itself suggests, the focus of

7 World-system vs. World Systems - There is a notable difference between the scope of the two terms which will not
be elaborated upon in this text.
socialism on the gain of the society rather than that of the individual, the models proposed in
antagonism to capitalism cannot solve the societal inequalities it represents for they employ its same
determinant factors of production: labour, land, enterprise and capital. In order to achieve an
economy which is not inherent of inequalities, one must first change the determinants of production
to exclude those aspects of them harmful to a society. I would thus propose a new model.
The term “labour” and the exploitation of human work-force it implies should be replaced
by “human potential” signifying the entirety of experiences and knowledge of a human being.
Production should not be determined only by the amount of energy one puts in physical and mental
energy one puts into a task, but by the entire spectrum of the human potential – physical, spiritual,
intellectual, artistic and moral.
The word “land” and the violent exploitation of the natural resources contained within it that
it implies should be replaced by “environment” signifying the entirety of the surroundings of a
society and the complexity of the natural and ecological processes therein contained. Production
shall no more be determined by the amount of materials extracted from, or grown on, land but,
rather, the effect that such has on the aforementioned processes.
The notion of enterprise should change from that of an economic process for the creation
and accumulation of wealth, and its concentration in the fewest possible hands, to that of a
categorically imperative economic action. Each economic process must not be harmful to any
individual or group within a society, or their entirety which comprise the human race.
The concept of capital should be abolished and replaced by that of resources. This should
not be such a paradigm shift if all three previous aspects have been, or are in the process of being,
asserted. When economic enterprise is not based upon the concepts of greed, but on that of altruism
and development, there should be no need for capital or its accumulation. Instead, the switch to a
resource-based economy - a system in which all goods and services are available without the use of
money, credits, barter or any other system of debt or servitude. All resources become the common
heritage of all of the inhabitants, not just a select few “thus eventually outgrowing the need for the
artificial boundaries that separate people. This is the unifying imperative”.8 The premise behind a
resource-based economy is that which has been argued all throughout this essay: that the Earth is
abundant with plentiful resources and the human practice of rationing them through monetary
methods and the exchange of currency is counter-productive to our survival.

If one accepts, even partially, the assumptions of the World-System theory developed by
Wallernstein, the installation of the economic model proposed above would also crumble to global
inequalities which define the status of nations as “developed” and industrialized (core),
“developing” and industrializing (semi-periphery), and “less developed” and rural (periphery). The
reason for the re-allocation of resources from periphery to core countries is fuelled by the capitalist
greed of the elites, often kept in power by the political elites of the core countries themselves to
protect their interests in the periphery, and transnational networks. This greed is fuelled by the
accumulation of capital. The abolition of capital as means of economic development would thus
urge nations and countries to employ their resources prioritizing local development rather than
export for profit. Although utopian in nature, I sincerely hope for such a model, or an equally
sustainable one, to prevail before the forces of pure and unadulterated greed corrode the
accomplishments that this amazing species of humanoid life forms living on medium-sized rocky
planet, in a small solar system presided by a small yellow dwarf star, within one of the countless
spiral galaxies, in an insignificant corner of the universe, has achieved.

"There are far too many smart, educated, talented people operating at quarter speed, unsure of
their place in the world, contributing far too little to the productive engine of modern civilization.
There are far too many people who look like they have their act together but have yet to make an
impact. You know who you are." -Po Bronson

8 http://www.thevenusproject.com/en/a-new-social-design/resource-based-economy