My parents lied to me. When we moved here, they told me that everyone in America lives in a beautiful house, has an abundance of fat chickens and pigs, and eventually becomes wealthy. In America, as long as you work hard, nothing can stop you from being wealthy.
The city is awful. It’s the ugliest place I’ve ever been. It’s nothing like the farm back home, and there are no chickens or pigs or fine houses- at least not where we live. The room we live in is so small, when we lie down to sleep we are never more than two inches away from each other. The tenements are crowded and dirty. But this is all my parents and I can afford.
It is so hard to find work, because everyone is so desperate for even the worst jobs. Some places will not accept applications from Irish, Catholics, or Jews. I was excited for my first day at work, until my hand was caught in the washing range and my fingers were hurt and bruised. I told the overseer, who then ordered me back to work. When I came to her again, she threatened to fire me. Standing long hours in the overcrowded, hot room is exhausting.
Some women in the mill talk of forming a union. This seems silly to me. Who would listen to a woman, especially a poor Jewish woman? I have heard of these organizations in Chicago. I heard that several years ago, four immigrant workers were killed for participating in a strike. While workers were protesting their deaths, someone threw a bomb at a policeman. Eight people were charged with the bombing, and seven of them were immigrants. Many people die to try to receive better wages or shorter hours. I cannot afford to get hurt or lose my job. My family depends on me.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Thoughts on Social Darwinism
Social Darwinism is the survival of the fittest in a human society. Economic competition among humans is especially relevant. During the late 19th century, social Darwinism was a prevalent idea shared by many Americans, especially government officials and wealthy citizens.
Affirmative action really didn’t begin until the 1960s, so in the late 1800s the newly freed slaves had to scrape together what they had in order to stay afloat economically. African Americans in the South faced inconceivable discrimination, which denied them the promise of life, liberty, and property guaranteed to everyone else (with the exception of other races who were also greatly discriminated against, such as Mexican Americans and Chinese Americans).
Our Lockean liberal society believes in a strong sense of rugged individualism- an unofficial declaration of “every man for himself”. American ideology also promotes and upholds the “rags to riches” individual, manifested in and endorsed by entrepreneurs such as Andrew Carnegie. It was expected that every man, no matter what hardships he faced, would be able to bring himself out of poverty without the aid of the government. These thoughts were echoed by prominent men such as Yale professor William Graham Sumner. It was thought that those who didn’t work (no matter the circumstances) did not deserve charity from the government. This sentiment of “undeserving poor” is undoubtedly echoed today, as it has been for years.
The term “welfare queen” was coined during Ronald Reagan’s presidency (an era of supply-side economics, deregulatory policies, and welfare opposition) to describe poor mothers who did not work and used welfare money on things like drugs and alcohol. Today, we still have people opposed to giving up their tax dollars to the “undeserving poor”. This issue has arisen a lot lately, since President Obama is committed to the abolition of poverty through welfare reform. Many Americans with conservative views on fiscal policy feel like they will be having their money stolen from them and given to a group of lazy, undeserving people.
I really don’t understand how you can distinguish the “deserving” poor from the “undeserving” poor so easily, and how you can decide that none of these people deserve government-funded assistance. I believe the government’s first job is to ensure the comfort and safety of its citizens. To say that all people can break free from the restraints of poverty regardless of their situation is simply untrue. The cycle of poverty is such a difficult thing to get through. I find it hard to believe that every poor single mother is an alcoholic using our tax dollars to support her habit. In fact, I’d say Ronald Reagan’s statements about these alleged “welfare queens” were greatly exaggerated. I believe these sentiments furthered the stigmatization and marginalization of the poor. It is a fact that it is hard to be a single mother trying to raise her children right- to feed them, clothe them, educate them, and try to survive on her own. Some people need help to survive. I don’t think it’s reasonable to generalize the poor, because everyone’s situation is different. Everyone deserves an equal chance at what our country promises us: life, liberty, and property. Since many experience unsurpassable impediments, some people need help to achieve equality. If everyone is truly equal in the eyes of the government, why should these people not be given the help they need in order to achieve the things guaranteed to all Americans?
Affirmative action really didn’t begin until the 1960s, so in the late 1800s the newly freed slaves had to scrape together what they had in order to stay afloat economically. African Americans in the South faced inconceivable discrimination, which denied them the promise of life, liberty, and property guaranteed to everyone else (with the exception of other races who were also greatly discriminated against, such as Mexican Americans and Chinese Americans).
Our Lockean liberal society believes in a strong sense of rugged individualism- an unofficial declaration of “every man for himself”. American ideology also promotes and upholds the “rags to riches” individual, manifested in and endorsed by entrepreneurs such as Andrew Carnegie. It was expected that every man, no matter what hardships he faced, would be able to bring himself out of poverty without the aid of the government. These thoughts were echoed by prominent men such as Yale professor William Graham Sumner. It was thought that those who didn’t work (no matter the circumstances) did not deserve charity from the government. This sentiment of “undeserving poor” is undoubtedly echoed today, as it has been for years.
The term “welfare queen” was coined during Ronald Reagan’s presidency (an era of supply-side economics, deregulatory policies, and welfare opposition) to describe poor mothers who did not work and used welfare money on things like drugs and alcohol. Today, we still have people opposed to giving up their tax dollars to the “undeserving poor”. This issue has arisen a lot lately, since President Obama is committed to the abolition of poverty through welfare reform. Many Americans with conservative views on fiscal policy feel like they will be having their money stolen from them and given to a group of lazy, undeserving people.
I really don’t understand how you can distinguish the “deserving” poor from the “undeserving” poor so easily, and how you can decide that none of these people deserve government-funded assistance. I believe the government’s first job is to ensure the comfort and safety of its citizens. To say that all people can break free from the restraints of poverty regardless of their situation is simply untrue. The cycle of poverty is such a difficult thing to get through. I find it hard to believe that every poor single mother is an alcoholic using our tax dollars to support her habit. In fact, I’d say Ronald Reagan’s statements about these alleged “welfare queens” were greatly exaggerated. I believe these sentiments furthered the stigmatization and marginalization of the poor. It is a fact that it is hard to be a single mother trying to raise her children right- to feed them, clothe them, educate them, and try to survive on her own. Some people need help to survive. I don’t think it’s reasonable to generalize the poor, because everyone’s situation is different. Everyone deserves an equal chance at what our country promises us: life, liberty, and property. Since many experience unsurpassable impediments, some people need help to achieve equality. If everyone is truly equal in the eyes of the government, why should these people not be given the help they need in order to achieve the things guaranteed to all Americans?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)