The functionalist perspective on ethnic stratification

Functionalism is a sociological theory that views society as a system of interconnected parts working together to maintain stability and order. It emphasises meritocracy, where individuals achieve social positions based on their abilities and efforts, and value consensus, which refers to the shared norms and values that bind society together.

In the context of ethnic inequality, functionalists argue that Western societies like Britain operate on these principles. Early functionalist explanations suggested that children of immigrants would gradually assimilate into British culture. Assimilation means adopting the dominant culture's values and practices, leading to greater educational success and upward social mobility through better jobs.

This process would allow ethnic minorities to climb the social ladder, reducing inequalities over time. However, as economic gaps between Black, Asian, and minority ethnic (BAME) groups and the white majority grew wider in the 1970s, functionalists adapted their views. Events like inner-city riots highlighted BAME youth disaffection, prompting explanations that accounted for persistent ethnic differences and inequalities.

The immigrant-host model

The immigrant-host model, developed by sociologist Sheila Patterson, provides a functionalist explanation for ethnic inequality in Britain during the mid-20th century. This model portrays Britain as a stable society disrupted by immigration.

Key features of British society in the model

Britain is seen as a basically stable, homogeneous society, where homogeneity means members share similar cultural characteristics and values. It maintains a high degree of consensus, or common agreement, over norms and behaviours. This creates social equilibrium, which refers to a dynamic balance among interdependent parts of society, keeping it orderly and functional.

Patterson argues that this equilibrium was disturbed in the 1950s by the arrival of immigrant 'strangers' from places like the Caribbean and South Asia. These newcomers held different cultural values, leading to tensions.

Culture clash between immigrants and hosts

A key element of the model is the culture clash, where differences in behaviour create conflict. For example, African-Caribbean immigrants were often viewed as boisterous and noisy. In contrast, the English 'host' population valued privacy, quietness, and 'keeping oneself to oneself'.

Patterson suggests these clashes stemmed from understandable fears and anxieties among the hosts, rather than outright racism. The English were uncertain about how to interact with the newcomers, leading to social discomfort.

Patterson's optimism for the future

Despite these tensions, Patterson was optimistic about race relations in the UK. She believed that over time, minority ethnic groups would achieve full cultural assimilation by abandoning their original ethnic values and adopting British ones. This would restore social equilibrium and reduce inequalities.

However, the model implicitly criticises minority groups for retaining their cultural practices, as this was seen to heighten white anxieties and hinder integration.

Causes of ethnic inequality according to the immigrant-host model

Patterson identifies three main causes of ethnic inequality, rooted in the interactions between immigrants and the host population. These causes highlight how differences disrupt social harmony.

The three causes of ethnic inequality

• Fears of the host population - The white majority feared social change and difference because Britain's social order relied on tradition and homogeneity. The arrival of diverse groups threatened this sameness.
• Competition for scarce resources - Sections of the host population, especially the white working class, resented competing with immigrants for limited jobs and housing, leading to tensions and unequal access.
• Failure to assimilate - BAME groups did not fully integrate into British society. Instead, they formed visible communities in inner-city areas like Brixton, Southall, or Toxteth. They retained elements of their home cultures, such as traditions, diets, dress, and religions (e.g., building mosques and temples). Religion, in particular, served as a defence against the secular values of the host society.

These causes, according to Patterson, explain why ethnic inequalities persisted, as they prevented smooth integration and maintained cultural divisions.

Evaluation of the immigrant-host model

While the immigrant-host model offers a functionalist lens on ethnic inequality, it has faced significant criticism from various sociological perspectives. These evaluations highlight its limitations and alternative explanations.

Key criticisms and alternative views

• Undue optimism about assimilation - Patterson may have overestimated the ease of assimilation for first- and second-generation BAME individuals. They faced strong opposition, including institutional racism in the police, casual racism in media and jokes, violence from groups like Teddy Boys and skinheads, and employer discrimination, which persisted into the 1980s.
• Evidence of adaptation in later generations - Some signs of assimilation or hybrid identities have emerged. For example, sociologist G. Johal notes that many young professional Asian people adopt a 'Brasian' identity, blending British and Asian cultural elements to navigate both worlds effectively.
• Role of anti-racism legislation - Assimilation was impractical without laws banning discrimination. Today, it is illegal to discriminate against minority ethnic groups in employment, housing, and other areas, which has facilitated greater integration.
• Marxist perspective - Marxists argue that racism and ethnic inequality serve capitalism by dividing the working class. Racial divisions between Black and white workers prevent unity, reducing the likelihood of collective action to challenge the capitalist system.
• Postmodernist perspective - Postmodernists reject assimilation as the goal, advocating instead for multiculturalism, where diverse cultural identities coexist and enrich society rather than being erased.