The United States and India both exhibit stratification that limits upward mobility, but they differ in basis, rigidity, and institutional support. In brief: India’s system is traditionally caste-based and tied to birth, while the US system is class-based and more fluid though structurally persistent.

Key differences

• Basis of stratification

  • India: Historically, caste (varna) categories linked to occupation, ritual purity, and lineage. The main varnas are Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, and Shudras, with Dalits as a historically marginalized group. The government later introduced protections and affirmative action for Scheduled Castes and Tribes to address past oppression. This system is deeply embedded in social norms and, in some contexts, in law and policy.dummies+2​

  • United States: Class position primarily follows economic resources, education, and occupational status. Although not codified by birth, wealth and access to opportunities create durable advantages or disadvantages. Social mobility exists but tends to be limited by structural barriers such as inequality of opportunity, though evidence suggests greater mobility than India’s traditional caste system in many cases.enotes+2​

• Mobility and rigidity

  • India: Caste tradition is highly rigid at birth; changing caste status is not possible, though individuals can improve social standing through education, marriage, or economic success in some contexts. Caste hierarchies continue to influence marriage patterns, landholding, and political power, despite legal protections against caste-based discrimination.wikipedia+2​

  • United States: Class mobility exists, with individuals able to alter their economic position through education, entrepreneurship, or employment. However, mobility has become more constrained in recent decades, and disparities by race and family background persist. A person born into lower income can, in some cases, ascend economically, but social closure around certain elites remains.shortform+2​

• Social meanings and consequences

  • India: Caste is intertwined with religion, ritual status, community etiquette, and sometimes political power. Discrimination against lower castes has been widespread historically, prompting legal reforms, reservation policies, and ongoing social debates about equity and social justice.pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih+2​

  • United States: Class differences shape access to quality education, housing, healthcare, and social networks. Racial and ethnic factors often compound class effects, leading to persistent gaps in opportunity and outcomes. The system emphasizes meritocracy, though merit is unevenly distributed by context and region.theglobepost+1​

• Policy interventions

  • India: Government programs reserve seats and provide affirmative action for underrepresented groups (Scheduled Castes and Tribes) in education and employment; efforts continue to address caste-based inequality while balancing social and political considerations.hinduamerican+1​

  • United States: Policy tools include progressive taxation, social welfare programs, and affirmative action in education and employment in some contexts, aimed at expanding opportunity for disadvantaged groups, though debates over effectiveness and fairness persist.enotes+1​

Similarities in broad terms

• Both systems involve social stratification that influences access to opportunities, wealth, and power. In both cases, birth or origin can correlate with life chances, even as movement across strata occurs in practice.dummies+1​

• Both have evolved with legal and policy interventions attempting to reduce discrimination and broaden access to opportunity for historically disadvantaged groups.hinduamerican+1​

If you’d like, I can tailor this comparison to a specific angle—historical development, policy impacts, or contemporary social dynamics—and include concise case studies or data points from reputable sources.