The analysis of social structure as a means to understanding the role of liberal art programs offered by small colleges is grounded on the social-conflict theory advanced by Charles Wright Mills. Mills contended that social stratification played a monumental role in shaping societal economic and political discourses, leading to a capitalist society where the power elite occupied the controlling realms. The common masses occupy the bottom of Mills’ executive triangle. In such a socially stratified society, the power elite who own most of the nation’s wealth, control its financial institutions, education facilities, mass media, and are major influencers of politics. Mills’ concepts were instrumental in criticizing of the nation and its conscience (Form, 2007). One aspect worth noting is Mills’ insistence about intellectuals’ perception of work and non-work as inseparable, an argument advanced in the analysis of power and elite. What Mills attempted to highlight is the inability of the unemployed to control their destiny in matters of work. The situation is worsened by the capitalist approach that advances the social construction of perception of prestige colleges and universities as conduits for producing graduates who can fit into an existing system. The analysis from the perspective of liberal arts is based on the perception that small colleges that offer these courses seek to disrupt the status quo through recognition of the potential of all people towards the betterment of their society.
The components of the social structure play an important role in understanding the interaction between people and different social phenomena in the society. Mann (2008) observed that Mills highlighted the negative relationship between different components of the society. The middle-class, a historically influence social class, has been overwhelmed by bureaucracies that are robbing it of independent thought and turning them into automations through coercion or physical force, authority, and manipulation. The relationship can be understood by examining the different component of social structure that includes social institutions, social groups, social statuses, and roles. Social institutions are supposed to help the society meet its basic needs, but they are under siege from powerful and wealthy individuals, governments, and education and religious institutions. The implication is that these institutions are positioned to serve the interests of the power elite at the expense of the society. The power elite form the primary social group that controls all aspects of the society, while the masses are the secondary group. The groups are defined by their social statuses that are either ascribed or achieved, and emphasized through status symbols. Social roles are supposed to guide individuals’ behavior and enable them to predict the behavior of those around them. Roles are founded on expectation and performance, and are a source of conflict and strain because of the different ideologies developed from other components of social structure. Overall, the components of social structure play important roles in dictating how people behave in a framework that is created. Such behavior is largely linked to social statuses, which refer to positions occupied by people and associated rights and obligations. My placement in a small liberal art school allows perception of the social structure from the perspective of an underprivileged student and society member. My opinions is that the modern society has a skewed social structure that favors the powerful elite and condemns the masses to unnecessary suffering due to unequal access to economic and political opportunities. The control of social institutions by the powerful elite has created and maintained social statuses based on economic and political influence, a development that needs to be addressed to reverse the situation.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The concept of social structure and its underlying causal salience for everyday activities and decision-making are captured in intellectuals’ perceptions of work. For instance, when a handful of people do not have jobs, and fail to seek for jobs, the most at hand solution is to look for causes in their immediate situation and character. On the contrary, when a dozen million people are unemployed, it cannot be explained by the theory that they were lazy and turned out to be unfit. The phenomenon is explicable using the structural unemployment theory that recognizes the inability of the unemployed to control their job chances (Scambler, 2013). One can only fully understand the implications of the phenomenon if they come from a disadvantaged background. The minority groups perceived to be of lower social class, insignificant economic and political influence have been victims of the power elite systems. For me and most other students, doing liberal arts in a small college is a necessity rather than a choice. Take for instance an example where all students apply and hope to be accepted at Harvard University. A visit to the University Wikipedia page revels that the institution has a 6% acceptance rate. It translates to hundreds of the thousands that apply for positions in the University. Majority are locked out by the high fee, which is approximated to be $18,000 after aid. On the other hand, the graduation rate for Harvard is 98%. Given the prestige and lucrative status associated with the institution, its graduates are sought after in the job market and are given priority over those form other colleges. Such graduates are ideally marked as middle-class individuals, and have relative influence in the society. Their collective political power is only second to the wealthy, a situation that serves to propagate a certain political milieu.
Social stratification of the society is a complex phenomenon with indelible effects on those who belong to the lower classes. Education for disadvantaged students in less prestigious liberal arts colleges presents major financial challenges. For most of us, balancing between work, school, and family has become a norm. The phenomenon is unrecognized by the existing system that is founded on thinking that is devoid of progress and egalitarianism. Such thinking is never criticized or questions because most individuals in the society never notice they are making assumptions that advance it. The situation highlights the disconnect between different social classes whose thinking is founded on deeply held assumptions that cannot be questioned because the questions are colored by the ingrained beliefs driving the assumptions. For this reason, social stratification has consistently nurtured the failure to recognize the economic and political effects of falsely held assumptions on disadvantaged and minority groups. Therefore, understanding social structure can be insightful in recognizing and appreciating the negative and positive effects it has on underprivileged members of the society. Liberal arts provide a lens through which what is perceived to detrimental social constructions are highlighted and criticized to inspire change in the society’s conscience.
References
Form, W. (2007). Memories of C. Wright Mills: Social structure and biography. Work and Occupations , 34 (2), 148-173.
Mann, D. (2008). Understanding society: a survey of modern social theory . Don Mills, Ont. New York: Oxford University Press.
Scambler, G. (2013). C Wright Mills: Social structure v personal milieu. Retrieved from http://www.grahamscambler.com/c-wright-mills-social-structure-v-personal-milieu/.
