How does society change?
By intelligent believable ideas or by dummbing it down for control for which educators are responsible. Many educators rehash others ideas and they may not have properly understood them in reality or context, or have ever verified them in reality.

The way change occurrs is by promotion of a world view that influences people; So their values and attitudes is what is deemed important to the majority. These values occur by example and teaching of ideas.

The changes in our present society have been mostly through (media) television, radio and street talk. By that I mean what are people talking about that they feel is most important to them. Money is merely an object of one's attitude - based in attitudes of greed, generosity or sloth. So by groups lobbying the Government for change the Government has to consider the fears and values of the majority of people in a democratic society.

Social change is currently happening by infiltration of Western freedoms affecting undercurrent changes in China and Iran as evidenced by the peoples movements.

What do you feel needs change in your circle of friends? Start to vision what you want to happen and talk about it. Start a peoples movement. Be positive about what type of society you envisage

Enox

What do you mean by class difference. Not many of us are Hindus. Do you mean wealth or what suburbs we live in or what standard of education we have. This country has more opportunities than most. Most people living in 'poverty' in this nation have made very bad life choices. Many carry a victim mentality which keeps them where they are. Our nation rewards bludging and supports a lifestyle of laziness and drugs. This adds more to class distinction than anywhere else. We have just gone through a boom where anyone who could breathe could get work and yet we still scream poverty. I suggest you go to some countries where poverty exist because of corrupt Governments and compare these poor peoples situations with many here who would not work in an iron lung

E Knox your question is a very relevant one.

Unlike one poster has suggested, “Class” is not about “Money”, at least not in Australia, although the same would not be as wholly true for UK.

If you look at Australian society, 1/3 rd the millionaires and multi-millionaires are first generation migrants, example Richard Pratt. These people arrived without allegiance to any social “Class” and made their way to the top of Australian society by virtue of their own efforts.

“Class” is neither good nor bad, people who act with “Class” are invariably socially affable. People who act like snobs are merely displaying their lack of real “Class”.

Class differences tend to refer to differentials in socio-economic criteria and circumstance, more than simple “social class”.

Hence, people who happen to earn a little are not the de-facto working class nor are the better off “middle class” and nor are the high-earners “Upper Class”. I would note Margaret Thatcher, who achieved political prominence as a world leader was the daughter of a "Middle Class" shop owner in UK and Disraeli, being Jewish was almost a social outcast (at that time), yet he again lifted himself to the highest political prominence.

To speak personally, like many other Australians, we do not assess our individual merit of success on aspiring to any particular “Class” but on the moral values, defense of our independence and work ethic which we practice in our daily lives.

Those who do consider themselves a particular “Class” are often using it as an excuse / shield for their personal shortcomings, whether that "Class" be "Upper", "Middle" or "Working".

MAybe you should read Maslow and his "Hierarchy of Needs", before completing your dissertation... you will find it an interesting comparision from which to view people, beyond the limited context of which you are presently asking and being fed.

Society is a fascinating subject and one of the most fascinating changes to a society was when Christianity took over Roman Society. The Romans were a society that was arguable the most civilized for it time, and at one time the centre of the Roman Empire, was in York in England and the Emperor lived there. The Romans were in England for about four hundred years, but the startling changes occurred in Italy.

An independent atheist researcher concluded that Christianity took over Rome, by its leadership. Roman society was essentially dirty and there was lots of pollution and unhygienic conditions in their cities. Christians came into these cities and established churches, were persecuted but persisted, and over a period of three hundred years after the death of Jesus Christ, was the State religion of Rome.

Because it was dirty and they had no contraception, it was safer for a pregnant woman to have her baby, and throw it out if it was unwanted, than to have an abortion. These babies were left on the streets at night for the dogs to eat, but the Christians believed in the sanctity of life, and gathered up lots and lots of babies and reared them. The ones thrown out were mostly girls, so the Christian Churches had lots and lots of female members, while Roman families had many more males. When it came time to seek out a mate, the only places with a ready supply of wives were the Christian Churches, so the males became Christians to get mates.

When the plagues struck, spread by rats and fleas and dirt, Society fled to the country, but the Christians stayed behind and cared for the sick. Based upon their belief that we are only in this world for a limited time, and having faith in their God, the Christians cared for the sick and comforted the dying. The same sort of thing is happening in Africa today with Aids. The Christians are staying and helping the sick and orphaned, in places like Uganda, and caring for the widows and orphans

Little changes in simple things can have macro effects on the way society functions. The simple expedient of abolishing jury trials in civil matters in New South Wales to satisfy a gangster, has created an Australian Aristocracy, with an arrogance to rival the flashest European Prince. Admission to this aristocracy is through the Legal Profession, and that is the only way in. It has come about because the great egalitarian philosophy that is Christianity has been set aside, and a new philosophy based on dishonesty and corruption has taken its place.

Before 1970 in New South Wales these Effete Snobs, were not entitled to judge another person without consent. To sit without a jury, required written consent and it was no use bribing a Judge, because he did not make the decision. Since then New South Wales has become Rort Central, and as they said in another posting, the tender process is controlled by the party in power, and they determine who gets the work. The rorters simply build in the graft into their price.

There is a conflict between the Federal and State Parliaments, which the last Liberal Government lacked the will to tackle, simply because it was using the State Governments to do what it was prohibited from doing itself because of the Constitution. There is an ineffective and useless Federal Supreme Court in Canberra, with hopeless lawyers getting $7,000 a week tax free as the head Aristocrats in Australia. Most but not all these aristocrats are from certain elite schools but not all.

The other class of aristocrats are the leading politicians, who use their positions to establish personal fortunes, or simply sit back and let the Parliamentary Superannuation they have make them rich. That route to aristocracy is fairly dangerous, but for a lawyer, can lead to a position as a Judge, and the Holy Grail.

We agreed to merge all denominations in a Commonwealth. At your age I had high hopes for it. Little did I know that micro changes, little things like allowing Judges to make laws independently of Parliament, would destroy my Australia

I'm sure E Knox will find Peter the Babbler's latest fanciful ramble very useful in addressing his/her assignment on the 'Hierarchy of Australian Society' - not to mention the equally irrelevant contributions of various others.

Like I suggested before, E Knox should go to a library and get some authoritative information about the notions of class and social change how they manifest in Australian society. It wouldn't be a bad idea if some of the adults here did the same.

E Knox, some more advice - define your terms and stick to your topic. Avoid extraneous diversions into irrelevant notions like caste, Hinduism, Maslow's (psychological) hierarchy of needs, the Marshmallow Test and abortions in ancient Rome.

Some people here would clearly fail your high school assignment, which is another good reason to source your information and ideas somewhere a little more reliable.

Cheers.