The irregular distribution of power, advantages, material rewards, and opportunities among groups, may be because of stratification within the culture. Racial and ethnic stratification may be referred to as a system of structured disparity where people receive dissimilar amounts of resources in the society based on ethnicity. Level of power may be determined due to a person’s diversity from the prevailing group (Andersen and Patricia, 1997). This diversity may be generally physical and cultural. In these ethnic groups; the prevailing group may be more greatly ranked, and those that may be considered different may be ranked lower. The lower ranked ethnic groups normally take a subordinate place to those of the prevailing group. This ethnic groups’ comparison to ones owns group may be referred to as ethnocentrism.
Ethnocentrism may be one of the edifice blocks of racial and ethnic stratification. In addition, competition for similar scarce resources and diverse levels of authority may lead to the advancement of racial and ethnic stratification. When the prevailing culture is determined, a larger gap in power distribution establishes the strength of that stratification structure (Holsinger, 2004). The more influential the prevailing group may be, the stronger the system becomes. The prevailing group makes use of its power to hunk the other groups’ development and congeals their own dominance.
The race and ethnic relations model that provides the best sociological explanation for the information in table one and two is the assimilation model. The U. S. may have a stratification system that may be based chiefly on physical appearances. Competition for authority and the inconsistency that comes from it sprouts the irregular distribution of power, advantages, material rewards, and opportunities among racial and ethnic groups (Andersen and Patricia, 1997). Many ethnic groups have in America may be one of the most diverse nations in the globe due to it’s ‘everyone is welcome policy’. The numerous diverse cultures of the groups that live in America go through numerous levels in order so as to have similar advantages and fit in with the popular groups. A good illustration of an ethnic group that has been extremely categorized and not largely assimilated in America may be the Hispanic group. Hispanics may be the largest ethnic group that largely struggle for integration into the American Society.
Hispanics may also be one of the ethnic groups that face a huge amount of controversy, both politically and socially. Illegal immigrants may be one of the scorching topics in the ‘American society’. The reason behind this may be for the reason that these immigrants, who may also be considered as ethnic groups, may be discriminated and their rights; hence, their quality of life may be more or less non-existing. Numerous Americans view these ethnical groups as lesser and more of a bother to the government and country. Nevertheless, the reality may be that they are human beings likes everyone else and they deserve a better quality of life and change for betterment. In turn, they may be humiliated and prevailing ethnic groups take advantage of them when in the labor market in our America; hence, their income per capita becomes lower. Since they may be considered inferior and may be not adequately assimilated, most of the occupations they perform may be considered as low-jobs, and as a result, they may be exploited and underpaid by numerous organizations.
On the other hand, the Asian American may be faced by numerous to overcome, one being ‘stereotyping’, which is used to class them class before being given a chance to assimilate well into the American society. Their beliefs and culture brought most of these stereotypes and numerous older Asian Americans have tried to grip on to their culture in their homes excluding the assimilation used outside to try and blend in to the America culture. The American government has not made any effort to group any ethnic culture in America; however, the norm may be that for most groups that desire to blend in with the prevailing groups have flopped socially, educationally and economically.
It can be clearly seen in tables one and two, that the application of the assimilation perspective has been successful to American ethnic groups. Ethnic disparities in the white population may have lessened in terms of residential location, intermarriage and socioeconomic achievement (Holsinger, 2004). Comparing the data of percentage of income per capita among different ethnic groups in America signifies a marked decline in occupational concentrations; even though, these still demonstrates traces of the past patterns. There may be a demonstration of the great extent to the assimilation model perspective as applied Americans that assemble proof of persisting ethnic disparity.
In conclusion, one must concede that the literature on ethnicity stays unsettled in its conjectural core. The conscientiousness, perhaps even with the resurrection of ethnic conflict and difference in societies, right through the world, may have attracted much attention various social scientists. However, the paradoxes linked to ethnicity, confirmed in the U. S. by the assimilation of several groups, the prolonged disconnects and subordination of other ethnic groups, have yet to be taken care of; hence, a diminutive sociological explanation for the information illustrated in Tables one and two.
References
Andersen, L. and Patricia C., (1997). Race, Class, and Gender: An Anthology, (3rd Ed).
Wadsworth Publishing Company. Print.
Holsinger, J. (2004). The Residential Segregation of Arab Americans: A Question of
Assimilation. Conference Papers- American Sociological Association. Retrieved on
February 22, 2013, from SocINDEX with Full Text database.
