The Inegalitarian United States of America

“Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me. I lift my lamp beside the golden door." Quote from the statue of liberty

Introduction

The inegalitarian ideology has the ability to obtain many forms and evolve from a variety of political and social beliefs. The United States has through time been observed as the largest “experiment” in observing how liberalism and indeed democracy shapes an entire nation. The Toquvillian hypothesis concerning the building of a nation on egalitarian and equal rights should according to Roger M. Smith include the notion that the United States also largely has been affected by major inegalitarian ideologies especially concerning race and minorities. “For over 80% of U.S. history, its laws declared most of the world’s population to be ineligible for full American citizenship solely because of their race, original nationality, or gender. For at least two-thirds of American history, the majority of the domestic population was also ineligible for full citizenship for the same reason” (Smith, 1993, pp. 549). As proposed by Robert M. Smith (Smith, 1993, 549-566), the shaping of the United States should be observed as the construction of a country influenced with multiple traditions and with inequalities protruding and shaping this new nation. As exemplified with immigration, inequality persists and still promotes racial inequality as well as minority oppression. “Contrary to Toquevillian views of American civic identity, it did not matter how “liberal,” “democratic” or “republican” those persons’ beliefs were” (Smith, 1993, 549).

I propose that inegalitarian behaviour indeed is accompanied by a change in liberal views and furthermore is interlinked with current immigrational issues experienced in the United States. The rudimentary inegalitarian ideology which sadly protrudes liberal views reflects the movement of inequality from one focus to another.

As stated below the presence of this inegalitarian ideology evolves and we perceive hegemony in new differentiated ways. “…when older types of ascriptive inequality, such as slavery, have been rejected as unduly and illiberal, it has been normal, not anomalous, for many Americans to embrace new doctrines and institutions that reinvigorate the hierarchies they esteem in modified form.” (Smith, 1993, pp. 558).

A change in hierarchical societies in contrast to the Toquvillian hypothesis

Although inegalitarian ideologies can promote racial or minority discrimination there are cases in which ethnic groups which once where oppressed have turned to this ideology in frustration with socio economic problems. The steady stream of immigrants entering the United States has created interracial communities consisting of African Americans and Hispanic immigrants living together. In these intercultural settlements inegalitarian traditions have begun to flourish as African Americans feel alienated and frustrated with immigrants entering the country.

As presented in the article (NYT, 10/01, A1) racial inegalitarian ideologies are flourishing in communities in which the Hispanic population has begun to claim jobs previously held by African Americans. “The jobless rate for black men in Georgia is nearly triple that of Hispanic men, labor statistics show.… And many blacks express anguish at being supplanted by immigrants who know little of their history and sometimes treat them with disdain as they fill factory jobs, buy property, open small businesses and scale the economic ladder” (NYT, 10/01, A1). Liberalism in its purest form expressed by hard working, underpaid immigrants pursuing American ideals is being challenged by a growing prejudice displayed by frustrated African Americans who feel left out of society and presented with unequal opportunities. The African Americans which once where the oppressed minority and a huge contribution to the current multiple traditions America have all but forget that they once were oppressed and denied simple liberal rights. This modified form of racial hierarchy promotes inequality and elevates some racial groups which perceive themselves as more “liberal” then others.

Liberalism and the 700 mile fence

Liberalism as a political philosophy harbours the essential issues of freedom, individualism and equality (Welch, Gruhl, Comer and Rigdon, pp. 106, 2006). These common ideas are all combined in the American creed which derives from the liberal traditions (explained in Lecture 1 conducted by Professor Pamela Conover). This philosophy has through history shaped in which direction the United States has evolved and had great social impact. It is an ideology which is deeply rooted in many Americans and it has great political, social and personal value to the public. The fact that the individual has the freedom to shape his or hers future appeals too majority and is conceived by many as the icon of American political beliefs.

The liberal philosophy contrasts the hypothesis proposed by Roger M. Smith (Smith, 1993). Liberalism as a political and social philosophy largely prevents inequality and promotes equal opportunities. Throughout the course we have learned that inegaliterialism only exists if someone benefits from it and I believe that this statement demonstrates that although we wish to perceive the United States as a liberal country, inegalitarianism still prevails because a majority either benefits from it or the public denies its existence.

As liberalism has evolved during the course of time so has the inegalitarian ideology in society. If we observe racism and the oppression of immigrants living in the United States many liberal cornerstones are being challenged and the core of liberalism is exceedingly being confronted. We acknowledge the existence the massive Hispanic workforce but in some aspects deny them simple civil rights. Their labour is greatly appreciated but do these immigrants indeed share the same freedom and liberty as the common American citizen? Our core liberal beliefs have been challenged by personal material needs in which price and not worker welfare is at the forefront.

The Inegalitarian tradition as reflected in racism and minority inequality is currently relevant as congress has taken precautions towards decreasing immigration and improve border security (NYT, 09/21, A22). The current measurements involve stricter security measures and the building of a 700 mile long fence along the south western border. These measurements proposed by house and senate and recently signed by the president (NYT, 10/27, A16) should effectively reduce immigration and actively send out a signal that the united States are tough on immigration. However promising the bill does not propose what is intended to happen to the 11 million illegal immigrants currently residing in the USA (NYT, 09/27, A25).This anonymous workforce is caught in a political conflict in which they become objects and means to gather votes rather than moving closer to actual American citizenship. Furthermore as we will learn they have become a huge labor force in the agricultural and service minded sectors and Mexico as a country a large contributor to American economy.

SPECIFIC ILLUSTRATION – Concentrated on government and its activities

If we acknowledge liberalism as the right for the individual to achieve prosperity and freedom, the “fence” bill proposed greatly diminishes and gravely undermines the fact that immigrants living and working in the United States benefit in many social and economical aspects to the national economy. We only acknowledge the rights of this silent workforce when their influence or lack of such affects national economics or provokes political response. This is the case in California where the tightening of border control has reduced the number of immigrants which aid in the picking of fruit in orchards (NYT, 09/22, A14). Growers estimate the state fell short this harvest season by 70.000 workers” (NYT, 09/22, A14). The agricultural business which is very much dependent on the immigration workforce has all but been abandoned by Congress as it has neglected to provide a guest worker program and in effect created economical disaster for some farmers. “As they sum up this season’s losses, estimated to be at least $10 million for California per farmers alone, growers in the state mainly blame Republican lawmakers in Washington for stalling immigration legislation that would have addressed the shortage by authorizing a guest-worker program for agriculture” (NYT, 09/22, A14). The inegalitarian ideology flourishes and we denounce liberalism as we accept the treatment of immigrants as a workforce which should be seen but not heard. The above example clearly exemplifies the fact that we have become so dependent on the immigrant workforce that jobs which Americans easily could posses are left unoccupied. This is especially interesting if we observe the former example of African Americans which claim that there are no jobs for them to posses as they are all taken by Hispanics. Liberalism should in effect compete and challenge this inegalitarian ideology but we accept the unequal rights these immigrants are faced with and gladly keep them politically quit. This clearly contradicts with liberalistic views as we perceive the immigrants not as equals but as a “convenient necessity” conducting labour no others would bother to do. Governmental influence is diminished as the immigrational issue has become taboo. Public silence and the acceptance of this political taboo largely promotes inequality and confines this imigrational issue.

Transparency, silence and politics

The social inequality is accepted as long as this massive political power, which the immigrants have potential to become, is left suppressed and with no rights. As immigration has become a current political subject so has the votes by which they potentially could gather. As we have talked about in class when appealing to people and projecting an image of fear the general public is more persuaded to vote in favour of a given candidate. By “claiming” that immigrants do more harm then good frustrated unemployed Americans believe that it is the immigrants fault and are more liable to vote in favour of “extreme” candidates and harsh security measure. “Fran Garrett, a volunteer with the anti-immigration group United for a Sovereign America, based in Phoenix, said she was fed up with the authorities who refused to arrest and deport illegal immigrants. “They try to get the message out that they’re here to do jobs and all that,” Ms. Garrett said. “That’s not true. They are here to take over eight states of the United States, and they are going to do so it by sheer numbers alone…” (NYT, 09/05, A18). Fear and frustration harbours intolerance and promotes hierarchical prejudice and inequality.  Politicians neglect to grant attention to the immigrational problems and these are soon forgotten and demonstrations become useless.

The issue of immigration is no longer interesting as it does not appeal to the common American citizen. In turn this is reflected in the media coverage and issues which are discussed in Congress. “Mr. Muñoz also said that immigrants who had hoped the spring marches would move congress were feeling increasingly dishearted” (NYT, 09/11, A11). The acknowledgment of these immigrants and their contributions to our multiple traditions should in fact force lawmakers to pass bills and not stall these to death in Congress. Government and its lack of action in this case has created a large gap between these perpetual foreigners and the rest of the American people. This gap will only become increasingly bigger if we do not accept the presence of these immigrants and acknowledge that they too should be granted liberal rights.

In conclusion the measure to fence the south western border is an example of how liberalism has become a hierarchical label in which some people are entitled to its values and some are kept out. We acknowledge this inequality because we largely benefit from it and deny its presence. It is intriguing to take into account that the United States has grave financial ties towards Mexico as they are the 10th largest international lender to the United States. “Over all, Mexico's holdings of U.S. Treasury securities have risen 175 percent since the end of 2000, faster than the overall foreign increase of 112 percent, but far below the 462 percent gain in Chinese holdings. All told, Japan, China and Hong Kong now hold $1.03 trillion in U.S. Treasuries -- more than all foreign countries combined held at the end of 2000” (NYT, 11/04, C3).

America is still a country built on multiple traditions but also highly unequal traditions influencing and shaping the society in which we live. It is important to acknowledge that inegalitarian ideologies in effect should be considered one of the key issues which has affected the United States and in the future will influence how social, political and economical issues will be dealt with. In order to fully accept these unequal rights we must perceive liberalism as an ever changing force promoting freedom and equal rights but also confronting inequality and suppression. These unequal rights should be seen as a dynamic force altering the liberal philosophy and continuously shaping liberal thoughts and in effect the people living in society.

References:

New York Times articles

“Bridging a Racial Rift That Isn't Black and White; THE LATINO SOUTH: A New Rivalry”, NYT, October 3, 2006, A1

“Immigration movement struggles to regain momentum built in spring marches”, NYT, September 11, 2006, A11

“Accessory for a U.S. Border Fence: A Welcome Mat for Foreign Loans”, NYT, November 4, 2006, C3

“More immigrants die crossing border”, NYT, September 15, 2006, A17

“Immigrations lost year”, NYT, September 19, 2006, A22

“G.O.P. in Senate Narrows Immigration Focus to 700-Mile Fence”, NYT, September 21, 2006, A22

“Congress is winding down, but much is left undone”, NYT, September 25, 2006, A16

“Lawmakers agree to spend $1 billion on tightening border”, NYT, September 26, 2006, A21

“Senators criticize border security measures”, NYT, September 27, 2006, A25

“Looking over the wall”, NYT, October 10, 2006, A22

“Bush, Signing Bill for Border Fence, Urges Wider Overhaul”, NYT, October 27, 2006, A16

“Accessory for a U.S. Border Fence: A Welcome Mat for Foreign Loans”, NYT, November 4, 2006, C3

“Immigration movement struggles to regain momentum built in spring marches”, NYT, September 11, 2006, A11

“Rallies sound the drumbeat on immigration”, NYT, September 5, 2006, A18

“G.O.P. lawmakers set aside work on immigration”, NYT, September 5, 2006, A18

“Pickers few and Congress gets the blame”, NYT, September 22, 2006, A14

“Immigration reform, in pieces”, NYT, September 26, 2006, A22

“Immigration proposals”, NYT, September 13, 2006, A17

“Congress passes major security measures”, NYT, September 15, A19

“Guarding against every terror risk would bankrupt U.S., Chertoff says”, NYT, September 13, 2006, A14

Other sources:

Beyond Toqueville, Myrdal, and Hartz: The multiple traditions in America. Roger M. Smith. The American political science review, Volume 87, Issue 3 (Sep., 1993), 549-566

American Government tenth edition, 2006, – Susan Welch, John Gruhl, John Comer and Susan M. Rigdon