A brief Analysis of Inequality behind American Myths

The US, a country with the most multiple cultures and ethics in the world, is believed to be a melting pot in the modern world. The country was built on the foundation of liberalism and freedom after the battle against the colonization. Since then, this new continent has been viewed as the dreamland and attracted thousands of thousands of immigrants to pursue their American dreams. Thus, the US is one of the most inclusive countries that have different races, religious beliefs, and cultures and this social model has become one of the unique characteristics of the US. However, the melting pot is more like a myth than a reality to most Americans, especially immigrants. Though the society contains different races and cultures, immigrants and minor groups still receive unfair treatments and the rich white people still enjoy their privilege and more opportunities. In fact, the American dream is built on many myths, including the democracy myth, the success myth, the education myth, and the family myth. This paper aims at revealing the real facts of these four myths and analyzing the social inequality and discrimination behind the so-called American dreams and the melting pot. The analysis shows that the American dream in the modern US society is based on the unpractical democracy myth, the success myth, the education myth, and the family myth. Social classes and social wealth are always the key factors that influence an individual’s success by creating unequal opportunities to education, jobs, family impacts, and racial recognitions.

To begin with, the inequality and discriminations still exist in the current American society because the concept of melting pot simply refers to different races and cultures co-existing together, not blending and understanding with each other. People always think the US as a melting pot, which could accept and embrace different religions, races, and cultures with democracy and equality. However, the fact is that there still exists the hierarchy that creates the inequality between different cultures and religions. And the racial discrimination still can not be eliminated from the American society even though Obama has been elected as the first American black president. After the Paris Attack, the US, just like many other countries, accepts Syrian refugees. But many states refuse to accept Syrian refugees due to the hate of Muslim and the fear of terrorists. This reflects the serious racial discrimination in the US. Most Americans regard people from the Middle East as terrorists who are planning to launch the second 9.11 attack. However, President Obama argued that this refusal was against the American value, which was democracy, equality, and justice. In the beginning of the foundation of this country, Thomas Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence that “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” (Colombo 632). If people embrace this concept of equality and rights, they should welcome those refugees from the Middle East who are also innocent victims. However, the racial concept and the terrorist attack in Paris make Americans difficult to treat Syrians as equal as themselves. Besides, people from other races and religions also suffer from the unequal treatments because they are the minor group in the society. For example, African Americans have been fighting for their rights and equality since they were brought to this country with the slavery trade. Though the victory of the civil war in 1865 abolished the slavery system, the government still failed to earn the equal rights for the black. After generations’ efforts, the social status of the black improved, especially when the US has its first black president. Nevertheless, the racial discrimination still existed in the modern society. The Ferguson case in 2014 exposed the racial discrimination in the American justice system. Since then, another 29 black citizens had been killed within a year. Recently on August 9^th, a young black man Brown was shot to death in a dispute with a white police officer Wilson. The unfair law enforcement based on the racial discrimination aroused widespread concern of the racial discrimination phenomenon in the US (Baynton 47). Cases of this kind reveal the racial inequality in the American society, even in the judicial system which is supposed to claim justice and rights for those black people. Also, people of color earn a less salary and live in a poorer community. The social inequality makes them control less social wealth than the white, which in turn, consolidates the inequality of their social status and social power (Chae 108). Besides, the social media tend to boost the image of blacks as violent and aggressive. The social media broadcasts more death cases with blacks sentenced to be guilty, while the white innocent or simply in charge of minor responsibilities. The social media guides the public’s concept of other races for the superiority of the white and the interests of the authority. With the globalization and the growth of the illiberal regimes, the social media, like Google, has encountered new threats to the press freedom. They have to tailor the content to the tastes of the authority and the rich and sacrifice the freedom and justice (Colombo 646). In this sense, the inequality penetrates into different aspects of the society and consolidates the inferior social status of other races. The melting pot is not to embracing different races, cultures, and religions with democracy and equality, but to prove the dominant position of the white and consolidate this hierarchy in the society.

In addition, the success myth in the US is replaced by unequal opportunities and obstacles brought by social hierarchies, which limit the possibility of individuals from low social class to achieve success. Many immigrants come to the US to pursue their American dreams because they believe that in the US, people can be whoever they want if they work hard. The success myth persuades people that social classes are irrelevant to the individual success and everyone has an equal chance to succeed. A person can achieve success as long as he/she is dedicated to hard work, sacrifice, and perseverance (Soto 26). However, the modern society witnesses millions of American dreams turn into bubbles due to the inequality in the society. Social classes and social wealth will always be the key factor in an individual’s success. Though the US is always boosting its democracy, the social class is still affects an individual’s life. The difference in class determines where people live, who their friends are, how well they are educated and their future jobs (Colombo 290). People from the higher social class tend to have more human resources and family relations that could provide them with a better opportunity to success. In order to achieve the same success, people from lower social class have to take more efforts and conquer more obstacles. The wealth difference in the US is also very severe. Sixty percent of Americans hold less than 4 percent of the nation’s wealth while the richest one percent of the American population holds nearly 24 percent of the nation’s wealth (Colombo 285). With the unequal distribution of social wealth, people from the wealthy family have enough wealth to start their own business or provide superior conditions for their children. With the large social power and wealth within the control of a small percent of population, opportunities are also integrated within the control of this small group of people (Stephens 1235). The unequal distribution of social wealth and power contributes to the superiority of people from high social class and constitutes the unfair distribution of opportunities to success.

Furthermore, the family structure in the modern society is of multiple types and the family myth of 1950s nuclear family myth is not practical. Steve Jobs was adopted by the social class of blue collar and raised under the traditional nuclear family mode (Fredrickson 570). People tend to miss this family mode that could help people get good family impact. However, the 1950s family mode is not useful in the modern society. People feel nostalgic about the 1950s model family because this family mode provides a more family-friendly economic and social environment and a greater feeling of hope for a family’s long-term future (Colombo 27). However, with the increasing pressure from the family and large spending of raising a kid, many Americans choose to raise only one kid or even refuse to have kids. There has occurred a new family mode which comparatively lacks the family cohesiveness and mutual supports. People hope to have many brothers and sisters that could help each other and support each other when in troubles. However, Stephanie Coontz argues that “People today understandably feel that their lives are out of balance, but they yearn for something totally new—a more equal distribution of work, family, and community time for both women, children and adults” (Colombo 29). The key factor of an individual’s success does not lie in the support from other family members, but the social class and family wealth that an individual could enjoy. It is not practical to rely on supports from family members in order to achieve success and having more children in a family does not represent more opportunities (Fredrickson 569). That may bring more troubles than supports. The nostalgic feeling of the 1950s model family myth is people’s psychological comforts of putting the hope on others. It is difficult for an individual to cross his/her social class by family supports and hard working.

Last but not least, the education in the US is classified according to the social status and family wealth, which makes people in the lower class difficult to achieve success by the educational myth they believe in. For centuries, education is always regarded as the best way to change an individual’s fate and break the bondage of the social class. By education, everyone shall share the same opportunity to get access to knowledge and fight for his/her life by individual efforts. However, the individual opportunity of education in the real world is not as optimistic as people expect. The opportunity of education and the quality of education is quite different according to different social statuses and social wealth. As Jean Anyon argues, “It’s no surprise that schools in wealthy communities are better than those in poor communities, or that they better prepare their students for desirable jobs” (Colombo 163). Children from the middle class or lower class tend to go the public school due to the cheaper tuition. And rich kids, with the superiority from their family, get access to the education in private schools. Private schools charge much more than public schools, but their educational quality, the ability of teaching stuff, and educational resources and facilities are much better than those of public schools. Thus, children in private schools receive a higher quality of education and have more opportunities to go to the famous universities when they graduate. The privilege rich kids share in private schools is not only higher level of education, but also higher level of human recourses. The friendship between two kids from two wealthy families may lead to the cooperation of two big corporations in the future. And children with acquaintances of people from high social class tend to be easier to succeed. This is another investment of children other than the knowledge and ability themselves. Moreover, even in public schools, children still receive different educations according to the background of their families. Bowles and Gintis argue that students in different social-class backgrounds are taught by different methods and standards. For example, students from the working classes are rewarded for docility and obedience for they might continue to work in that social class like their parents. But students from the managerial classes are rewarded for initiative and personal assertiveness (Colombo 164). In the future, students from the working classes tend to continue to work in the working classes because they are taught in that way and the education they receive imply that they have to obey others’ orders. However, children from the managerial classes tend to work in the management class because they are trained to make decisions and give orders to others. Meanwhile, when universities consider the recruitment of students, students from wealthy families are preferred because universities could receive donations from these families. And the tuition difference of different universities helps universities select those students from wealthy families. The top tem universities in the US charged around $40,000 as the annual tuition in 2011. And normal families in the US were incapable to afford $40,866 a year to send their children to go to Harvard University (Rothman 63). And the scholarship is not accessible to a quite limited number of lucky ones. Universities in the current society have a high level of commercialization. In order to recruit enough good students, they organize matches, cooperate with big corporations, and hire celebrities to enhance their reputation and popularity (Henig 54). The phenomenon of over commercialization increases universities’ preference of students from families with fames and wealth. In some degree, famous universities are mainly for children from wealthy families. This privilege enables these children to have a good job in the high class and continue the difference caused by the educational difference and background difference.

In sum, the democracy myth, the success myth, the education myth, and the family myth in the US are not practical in the modern society. People’s American dreams in this melting pot are replaced with severe social inequality mainly caused by the unfair distribution of social power and social wealth. People in high social class and wealthy families tend to have more opportunities to the high-quality education, human resources, and jobs. This social inequality makes an individual difficult to achieve success simply by personal efforts or family supports.