“How does hierarchy get built into the systems of natural and social inequalities?” (2008)
Jean-Jacques Rousseau (Discourse on the Origin of Inequality, 1755) separated natural inequalities of age, strength and capacity from social inequalities of wealth, honour and power. Hierarchy is the ranking of such differences on a scale that society accepts as legitimate. André Béteille (The Idea of Natural Inequality and Other Essays, 1983) makes the key point: nature gives us only differences, and they become inequalities, and then hierarchies, when society applies scales to them. Hierarchy is therefore built in through a series of social mechanisms.
From natural difference to hierarchy
- Selection and evaluation. Every society chooses which traits count. A hunting society values speed and sight; a modern one values abstract intelligence. Béteille, drawing on Otis Dudley Duncan, notes that IQ tests measure the abilities that high-status occupations already reward, so “natural” ability is ranked by a social scale.
- Naturalisation. Social rankings are presented as biological facts. Herbert Risley (The People of India, 1908) read caste as race, colonial science graded “martial races”, and patriarchy treated sex differences as proof of male superiority. Nature is invoked to justify inequality.
- Functional importance. Kingsley Davis and Wilbert E. Moore (1945) argued that scarce talent must be drawn to important positions through unequal rewards. Melvin Tumin (1953) replied that the pool of talent is itself shaped by unequal access to opportunity.
Making social inequality a lasting hierarchy
- Inheritance and endogamy. Property passes to heirs, and marriage within the group keeps boundaries intact. B. R. Ambedkar (Castes in India, 1916) saw endogamy as the essence of caste.
- Legitimation by values. Louis Dumont (Homo Hierarchicus, 1966) showed that the opposition of purity and pollution ranks every caste. Max Weber traced how status groups turn honour into monopolies. Béteille calls an order harmonic when the distribution of rewards matches the prevailing values.
- Power and closure. Frank Parkin described how dominant groups use credentials, property or birth to exclude others. Karl Marx held that the ruling ideas of every age are the ideas of the ruling class.
- Internalisation. Karma, Antonio Gramsci’s hegemony and Pierre Bourdieu’s symbolic violence explain why subordinates often accept their place. Socialisation turns hierarchy into common sense.
Indian illustrations
- Caste: birth is ranked through ritual purity and fixed through endogamy.
- Gender: sex difference becomes a division of labour. Female labour force participation was only 41.7% in PLFS 2023–24.
- Class: meritocracy ranks educational credentials that themselves reflect family resources.
Limits
Hierarchy is never fully secure. Modern constitutional values make the order disharmonic, because the ideal of equality clashes with actual inequality, and so hierarchy becomes contestable. Dalit, feminist and peasant movements challenge the scales themselves. The Supreme Court’s 2024 ruling permitting sub-classification of Scheduled Castes shows hierarchies being recognised and reworked even among the disadvantaged.
Conclusion
Hierarchy is not found in nature; it is built by choosing scales, naturalising them, institutionalising them and getting people to accept them. Recognising that construction is the first step toward unmaking it.