Unique form of social stratification

As such, all societies have been known to be stratified with existence of self conscious groups varying in power, prestige and status. India is no exception to this. Yet India is presented as a unique case of closed mobility with class position fixed through ascription. Though there are dissenting voices by both Indians and Westerners but they hardly have any impact on mainstream sociology. Srinivas (1966) argues that the rigidity and immobility of caste is a myth, far from reality. Dumont (1970) wrote that to study social stratification in India one needs a different model which is based on holism and hierarchy. Zilberman (1988) argued that in India the present type of social organization (i.e. caste) is not to be understood in terms of Western principles of ‘hierarchy’ versus ‘egalitarianism’, or ‘collectivity’ versus ‘individualism’. It was closely tied with a Hindu thought system. Thus the present caste system is the result of the decay of Hindu thought categories, not the result of this. Mogul period, colonial history and processes of development after independence have disproportionately benefited different regions and groups in different manners. After independence, however, rapid development of the country has excluded many and even harmed economic and social interests of some. To put it differently, the costs and benefits of development varied from one group to another, often changing the degree and rigidity of stratification. The relationship between ascription and achievement that exists today is not a simple reproduction of the past. It is intertwined with processes of globalization and emancipation.