overlapping career patterns, and converging life styles, they are increasingly aware of their common fate and are forging a common program of action.
Many scholars believe that Mills's triad is an oversimplification of the problem of power. The political pluralists, among others, insist that no single occupation or combination of occupations have power over the direction of the economy and the society. Riesman, Bell, Rossi, and Dahl insist that the United States has a "mushy" social structure and that decision-making cannot be centralized into a single power elite. They assert that veto groups can stall the action of allegedly powerful interests and that even highly organized minorities can realize their will against complacent powerful groups. And Galbraith feels that the countervailing forces will counteract the efforts of any one group to take over the control of the American economy.6
The problem of empirically determining which occupations have greater dominance and power at various stages of industrial development remains complex and knotty in a highly dynamic economy with historical roots in a free market. In all advanced industrial societies the problem of maintaining a stable internal and external equilibrium has called for an increasing amount of political centralization of control in all areas of life.
Kingsley Davis and
Wilbert E. Moore
In the present paper a further stop in stratification theory is undertaken--an attempt to show the relationship between stratification and the rest of the social order.1 Starting from the proposition that no society is "classless," or unstratified, an effort is made to explain in functional terms, the universal necessity which calls forth stratification in any social system. Next, an attempt is made to explain the roughly uniform distribution of prestige as between the major types of positions in every society. Since, however, there occur between one society and another great differ-