The social system in America is based on ideals of equality and individual opportunity, whereas the Caste System in India is a hereditary, hierarchical social stratification that historically restricted social mobility based on birth. While both systems aim to organize society, the American system is more open and allows for more social mobility compared to the rigid structure of the Indian caste system.
I have the same question. But I'm resourceful. https://apworld.wikispaces.com/page/code/Compare+the+caste+system+to+other+systems+of+social+inequality+devised+by+early+and+classical+civilizations,+including+slavery
Feudalism was a medieval European system in which land was exchanged for military service, creating a hierarchical society based on loyalty and land ownership. The Aryan caste system, in contrast, was a social structure in ancient India that divided society into rigid hereditary groups, with one's caste determining their occupation and social status. Unlike feudalism, the caste system was based on birth and mandated limited social mobility.
An open system of social stratification allows for social mobility and the potential for individuals to move between social classes. In contrast, a closed system of social stratification rigidly maintains boundaries between social classes, making it difficult or impossible for individuals to change their social status.
The Iberian social order in Latin America was a hierarchical system that placed Spaniards born in the Iberian Peninsula at the top, followed by creoles (those of European descent born in the Americas), mestizos, Indigenous peoples, and enslaved Africans. This system determined social status, rights, and privileges based on one's race and ancestry, contributing to social stratification and inequality in colonial Latin America.
Yes, in colonial Latin America, the social hierarchy was established with Spanish colonizers at the top, followed by Creoles, Mestizos, Indigenous peoples, and African slaves at the bottom. This system, based on bloodlines and racial heritage, does mirror the feudal system in Europe which was based on land ownership and hereditary titles. Both systems were characterized by a rigid social structure with limited mobility and opportunities for those at the lower rungs.
The answer depends on what you wish to compare and contrast it with.
compare
Nunya 00
BLAH
I have the same question. But I'm resourceful. https://apworld.wikispaces.com/page/code/Compare+the+caste+system+to+other+systems+of+social+inequality+devised+by+early+and+classical+civilizations,+including+slavery
Feudalism was a medieval European system in which land was exchanged for military service, creating a hierarchical society based on loyalty and land ownership. The Aryan caste system, in contrast, was a social structure in ancient India that divided society into rigid hereditary groups, with one's caste determining their occupation and social status. Unlike feudalism, the caste system was based on birth and mandated limited social mobility.
An open system of social stratification allows for social mobility and the potential for individuals to move between social classes. In contrast, a closed system of social stratification rigidly maintains boundaries between social classes, making it difficult or impossible for individuals to change their social status.
what is the presence of Hispanics in the judiciary system in the united states what is the presence of Hispanics in the judiciary system in the united states
The best place to get an HVAC system on a budget would probably be a wholesale dealer. There are also various websites that will help you compare and contrast prices.
well their are valves in the human heart, and they control the amount of blood entering the heart, and the backflow of it aswell
they are very similar, both have: thin walls through which particles can pass consist of tiny projections occurs in huge numbers
A good way to do this assignment is by using a Venn diagram . Opening your book and making the Venn will give you the information you need.