Stratification & Social Class

Social class has always been a controversial issue, especially in the U.S. A social class system can be defined as a form of social stratification based primarily on the possession of money or material possessions. There are various different models of what different class rankings may look like, ranging from "underclass to capitalist class" to "poor to super-rich". Each of these models, however, represent a common idea: people are grouped according to their wealth, education, and culture. According to William Thompson, "it is impossible to understand people's behavior without the concept of social stratification, because class position has a pervasive influence on almost everything... the clothes we wear, the television shows we watch, the colors we paint our homes, and the names we give our pets... our position in the social hierarchy affects our health, happiness, and even how long we live". I definitely believe this is true because I have seen it on so many different levels in numerous instances.

Some might ask the question, what determines social class? There were two different main views of this in the early days of sociology, held by Karl Marx and Max Weber. Marx claimed that social class depends on a single factor: people's relationship to the means of production (tools, factories, land, and investment capital used to produce wealth). Weber argued that property wasn't the only determining factor. He claimed that social class was made up of three distinct factors: property (wealth), prestige (people tend to admire the wealthy), and power (ability to control others).

Today, I think there are even more factors that can determine what social class you belong to... and I also believe that there are even more levels of social class. For example, someone may be in the "super-rich" category, but I don't believe that necessarily makes them high-class people. What if they don't flaunt their wealth? What if they live well below their means? What if they flaunt their wealth distastefully? There are plenty of things that I believe can change their social standing besides the amount of money or material possessions they have. For example, I'm from San Antonio, TX and had the privilege of going to one of the wealthy high schools in the city. Note: my family is not necessarily in the "super-rich" category.  However, two of my best friends absolutely are. Their families are multi-millionaires and, to me, it's pretty obvious. My friends are quite "spoiled" (they drive Audi's and BMW's and wear Ralph Lauren polos every day), and they know that they're spoiled. However, because of where they grew up, this is not uncommon to them. They are used to seeing all of their friends have the same perks that they do. When I started going to this school, even though I wasn't in the "super-rich" class, I almost had to pretend like I was so that I would be able to fit in. In ways, it's very easy to put yourself into a social class that you don't necessarily belong to. Money and material items are what allow this. I went out and bought a few Ralph Lauren shirts (I know... kind of dumb... but it's high school) so that I would feel more like I belonged in their social class. I couldn't afford a nice car like they had, so there is an example of a barrier you can't really overcome, but I fit in pretty well, nonetheless.

All in all, the point I'm trying to make is that from experiences in my life so far, it seems pretty clear to me that money and material items are definitely the determining factors of your social class.  However, it's the various ways that you use them that can sort of "bend the rules" for what class you belong to (or are perceived to belong to). Obviously, this is just one point of view, but it's what I've experienced most. What do you think?