Discussions: US Stratification
India and the United States:
Caste Systems, Stratification, and Class
While the United States and India do not seem to have much in common, they do share one similarity (as do other countries): stratification. India divides their people up into groups called castes according to their Hindu beliefs and possibly because of their past. The United States has a series of social and economic classes that make up the population.
Both India and the United States' systems share several similarities and some differences. The similarities include how they are determined (race, religion, ect.), the reasons for having groups in different levels, and the reasons for having them. The differences include, and whether or not a person can change level, and what efforts the governments have made to de-stratify themselves.
India's caste system has many different origin theories. These include some religious and some historical. The most commonly accepted theory is that when invaders came to India, they divided the people into groups so as better to conquer them and set themselves up as rulers. This is explained by Aharon Daniel in his web page:
The social historical theory explains the creation of the Varnas, Jats and of the untouchables. According to this theory, the caste system began with the arrival of the Aryans in India. The Aryans arrived in India around 1500 BC. The fair skinned Aryans arrived in India from south Europe and north Asia. Before the Aryans there were other communities in India of other origins. Among them Negrito, Mongoloid, Austroloid and Dravidian. The Negrito have physical features similar to people of Africa. The Mongoloid have Chinese features. The Austroloids have features similar the aboriginals of Australia. The Dravidians originate from the Mediterranean and they were the largest community in India. When the Aryans arrived in India their main contact was with the Dravidians and the Austroloids. The Aryans disregarded the local cultures. They began conquering and taking control over regions in north India and at the same time pushed the local people southwards or towards the jungles and mountains in north India (Daniel).
To help promote their leadership they then began to group races together into castes. This helped the Aryans establish their control. In fact, the word Indian word for "caste" meant "color" originally. This is also supported by some of the region names that make up India:
In order to secure their status the Aryans resolved some social and religious rules which, allowed only them to be the priests, warriors and the businesmen of the society. For example take Maharashtra. Maharashtra is in west India. This region is known by this name for hundreds of years. Many think that the meaning of the name Maharashtra is in its name, Great Land. But there are some who claim that the name, Maharashtra, is derived from the Jat called Mahar who are considered to be the original people of this region. In the caste hierarchy the dark skinned Mahars were outcasts. The skin color was an important factor in the caste system. The meaning of the word "Varna" is not class or status but skin color (Daniel).
While India has "literally thousands of castes, or jatis," they have been organized into four major groupings (Haviland, 309). These include the Brahmins (priests), Kshatryas (warriors), Vaishyas (traders), Shudras (laborers), and the outcastes, or Untouchables (Ross). These caste groups determine where a person lives (in the case of the Shudras and Outcastes) and what profession he may take. Those who do not follow the rules of their caste or caste leaders may become outcastes. This even happened to Gandhi once. When he asked permission to go to England and was denied, he decided to go anyways. He was then outcaste and had to rely on his family to bring him back in to his caste (Ross).
In the United States social and economic standing often divides people from each other. There are no set classes but the higher, middle, and lower class are often referred to by politicians and ecumenicists. How high a person's income and how rich his lifestyle is can be ranked by these classes.
Another form of classification that often supplements the economic and social class is the race and gender classes. Traditionally, people of race and women get treated as second class citizens by the people of the United States. Their jobs are usually less paying and less desirable than jobs given to white males.
Like India, the United States also has a class of "untouchables." These are the homeless and unemployable. They roam the back alleys and streets looking for money and aid. Most of the time Americans would rather to not see them and therefore, choose to ignore them. They have become our lowest class level.
In understanding this, the similarities between India and the Untied State become clear. We both have levels of class that separate groups of people from associating with each other. In India, the Shudras and outcastes are even separated from their villages (Elango). In the United States, the homeless are "allowed" to sleep in the alleys but not in plain sight.
While India's caste system forces people into certain occupations, the United States allows people the freedom of choice. This has allowed some great men to escape their levels and move up. For instance, if a person, who was born into a middle-class home, was to work hard and invest wisely, he could raise his social and economic standing. This has been seen through many of America's great company leaders (such as Andrew Carnegie) and some great authors and social critics (such as Booker T. Washington).
In addition, both systems are based on certain factors within each society, but the main reason for having them is to maintain power in the higher classes. In India, only Hindus are allowed in the castes (other religions are outcaste) and then a person's level in the class is based on how Caucasian they are. Since Indians only marry within their caste, their racial purity is strictly maintained. In the same way, the United States differentiates between Caucasian males and women or people of other races. People in these groups often have harder times getting jobs or paid as well for their work as Caucasian males.
While interracial marriages are still considered taboo (by some) America has started to recognize and support them. This is not true of India where only members of the same caste are allowed to marry. America has also begun to enact laws and regulations for fair treatment of women and different races.
Finally, while India's class system is steeped in religion and remains rigidly in place, the United States has made efforts to de-stratify and become more egalitarian (McCabe). This shows that the United States has recognized that stratification can be harmful and counter-productive.
In conclusion, both India and the United States have become stratified societies. They both have many similarities and some differences. They both have different class levels, but the United States allows people to change between levels. They also both were formed (originally) to maintain power over the other classes, but through social reform the United States has begun to de-stratify and relinquish power.
McCabe, Marsha. South Coast Today. April 28, 2005. http://www.s-t.com/daily/02-01/02-18-01/e01li134.htm
Elango, Iniyan. Race and History.com. April 28, 2005. http://www.raceandhistory.com/historicalviews/10062001.htm
Daniel, Aharon. Information on India. April 28, 2005. http://adaniel.tripod.com/origin.htm
Ross, Kelley. The Caste System in Hinduism. April 28, 2005. "http://www.friesian.com/caste.htm"
Haviland, William A. Cultural Anthropology 10th ed. Australia: Wadsworth, 2002.
[Home] [Starwars] [Star Trek] [Anime] [Games] [Discussions] [About Me] [Links]