Note:
Gunnar Myrdal died in 1987, less than 70 years ago.
Therefore, this work is protected by copyright,
restricting your legal rights to reproduce it.
However, you are welcome to view it on screen, as you do now.
Read more about copyright.
Full resolution (TIFF) - On this page / på denna sida - VIII. Social Stratification - 31. Caste and Class - 2. The “Meaning” of the Concepts “Caste” and “Class”
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
Below is the raw OCR text
from the above scanned image.
Do you see an error? Proofread the page now!
Här nedan syns maskintolkade texten från faksimilbilden ovan.
Ser du något fel? Korrekturläs sidan nu!
This page has never been proofread. / Denna sida har aldrig korrekturlästs.
Chapter 31. Caste and Class ^ 671
and the adoption of a democratic Constitution, the country started out with-
out the heritage of royalty, a titled aristocracy or a church hierarchy. The
frontier, the mobility, the relatively democratic structure of higher educa-
tion, and the democratic form of government were factors hindering the
emergence of rigid class distinctions.® Even today a higher percentage of
Americans in the highest positions of wealth, authority, and culture have
near relatives on the farms or in the factories than do people of similar
status in most other capitalistic countries. A democratic simplicity and a
great deal of formal equality in everyday contacts have been characteristic
of America. The “American dream” and an optimistic outlook on the future
for every individual have been cherished.
On the other hand, there have been factors which have accentuated social
distinctions. These include: the immense and unprecedented differences in
income and wealth, which until recently have been left comparatively undis-
turbed by taxation j
the relatively unrestricted property rights inherited
from English common law, which not only allowed monopolistic exploita-
tion on a huge scale of the natural resources of the new continent, but
also permitted types of consumption directly intended to demarcate social
distance j** the relatively small scope of public ownership and controls over
consumption and production generally and particularly over natural
resources such as minerals, waterfalls, forests, and the means of transporta-
tion j
the relative lack of producers’ and consumers’ cooperatives j
the
absence, until recently, of organized efforts to equalize economic and
educational opportunities of rural and urban localities and of the major
regions of the country 5
the continuous mass immigration until recently and
the practice of ruthlessly exploiting immigrants j
the consequent cultural
and racial fragmentation of the lower strata of the population j
and the
lack of organized and persistent popular movements.
Even though there are tremendous differences in wealth and social
position among Americans, this is not the predominant influence in the
national ethos. The American Creed has insisted upon condemning class
differences, and it continues to do so in the face of the facts. Part of the
paradox is solved, however, when we observe that the American Creed
does not demand equality of economic and social rewards independent of
an individuals luckj ability and push. It merely demands equality of
opportunity, Abraham Lincoln expressed this in concrete and pertinent
terms:
• It is symbolic, but not directly important, that there is a provision in the Constitution
forbidding* the acceptance of titles of nobility.
^The unrestrictive property laws have, for instance, made it possible for rich people in
America actually to keep out the common people not only from the spots where their
homes are built but from whole sections of country including roads, lake shores, fields and
forests.
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
