 Another very interesting topic that was discussed by Lipset that is the concept of social mobility. Social mobility is basically refers to the shift in an individual's social status from one status to another. And a shift can either be higher, lower, intergenerational or intergenerational. And it cannot necessarily be determined if the change is forward or bad. Now, because the basic philosophy of Lipset's logic or reason is the human life and its interaction with society, and especially since it has highlighted the social basis, now when every individual plays a role in his life as a social base in which his present status comes and every person wants to change his status. Now, when he wants to change his status, when he wants to change his status, he can change his status within another status. Now, in this effort, sometimes this change goes towards the best, but sometimes that change, that effort, it can also be that instead of the best, that person can change his status instead of the best, that person can change his status below. For example, someone tried, he worked, he did business, that business was trying to improve his status, but instead of improving his status, the money went up and the human life went down. And that individual's effort went down. Now, similarly, in the philosophy of Lipset, the concept of social mobility, another important factor is that the shift can be higher, sometimes lower, sometimes intergenerational or intragenerational. Now, many times when people try to improve their status, it can also be that because of one individual, their entire family's status improves. For example, a person tries to improve his status, and that effort is so fruitful that its impact is that his entire family, his entire generation, can improve everyone's status, but it can also be that a single individual's effort is only limited to that. Why does that happen? Usually, many people get cut off, if they improve themselves, they don't want anyone to have this idea that their family's link was from which class, because social mobility definitely is linked with the class system. And when Lipset highlighted social stratification to social stratification, the important issue on debate is that how the classes are created, how the classes operate, and how the individuals try to change their class. And social mobility is a factor to change the class. And in that, sometimes, if an individual's effort is fruitful, but because of that individual's effort, his family's status doesn't improve, because that individual wants to keep that success, that effort, that gain limited to himself. So then, that class system creates another division in it, and the line of cleavages becomes more strengthened. And sometimes, definitely, social mobility can produce good results, and sometimes it can influence negatively. And Lipset has the perspective that social mobility has various implications. Now, the implications of Lipset's first important factor which Lipset highlighted, that is the implications on the social life, then implications on the political beliefs, and then, and very important and critical, and I think the favorite issue of Lipset, that is the political behavior. Because the outcome of social mobility, in its implications, first and foremost, is the social life of a person. For example, a person moves from one place to another as a result of his effort. So, as a result of that movement, the environment changes, the social realities change, and now, how will that individual do co-op with those social realities? Will those realities not influence his behavior? It is also possible that new hard realities make his life more difficult than the old ones. So, when you move in a class, you become used to of that specific trends of that class. But if you want to change the class, then definitely you have to opt new realities, new changes, and new demands. While opting for those demands, sometimes human behavior or human life becomes a victim of difficulties. Lipset has made a very detailed discussion in all these difficulties in his works. Then, political beliefs, as well as human's political beliefs are also under influence. For example, if a person had less money and more money, then if your political beliefs change, or if an affiliation was with a class, when your class changes, then you want your loyalties, whether you like them or not, your preferences also change. So, all this environment takes your behavior under influence. Then definitely, the human nature is based on those social realities, and its economic realities also determine its political behavior. And political behavior sometimes really reflects your social economic status. And social mobility, basically everyone desires to improve the present status towards the new one. Then definitely the change in the status or change in the position that again actually influence the political behavior. Not only in everyone's case, but majority has the trend to change the political behavior under the prevailing circumstances or under the privileged status.