![]() ![]() But the second map shows what they THINK their chances are for social mobility- for making it to the top. As you can see, they have the lowest social mobility in the country. The first map shows actual social mobility which exists in those states (shaded in light grey). Southerners, Facing Big Odds, Believe in a Path Out of Poverty - The New York Times what actually exists in terms of social mobility in those states (from a Harvard study): They are among the most conservative in the nation. But looking at Europe, the consequences of the "broken world" worldview, a world which we ultimately can and should try to make right, we have the Scandinavian countries who rank at the very top of the world in terms of overall happiness.īut let's look at the southern states of America. Of course, like any controversy, there are probably elements of both points of view to reality. They want to see themselves as completely free of, or at least able in theory to break free through, of such imbeddedness in their social/cultural/historical background. That's why Republicans get so upset when they are told of their business/financial success "you did not build that all by yourself", and all of the social/cultural/economic advantages are pointed out. America, on the other hand, I think tends more toward the "just world" premise. That's why they have such strong social/welfare programs. There are many large historical/cultural factors at play in which individuals are inextricably imbedded, and if we are going to have any semblance of a fair or just society, it's up to us to come up with smart and carefully thought out policies to try to do that.Ĭontemporary Europe, for example, I think operates on this "broken world" premise. Such success and failure does not, and should not, be thrown entirely on the shoulders of the individual. Such justice doesn't happen by itself when everything is just left free and alone. We may never be able to have equality of opportunity or outcome, but we can and should try at least to make this broken world a little more fair. is not going to have a level playing field with a child born to privilege, wealth, with private tutors, family connections, elite private college-prep ivy-league-feeding boarding schools, etc. A child who is orphaned at a young age, or born into a crime and gang-infested area, with a lot of poverty, maybe systematically discriminated against from a young age based on his/her skin color, or ethnicity, or religious/denominational background, etc. Liberals, on the other hand, believe in a "broken world". Let them hunt and forage for their own food. They need to learn the consequences and we should not allow the harsh consequences to be cushioned by welfare or aid from government. Those who fail at this task are therefore mostly just lazy, or stupid, or just not applying themselves. It seems to me that conservatives believe in a "just world": that success is ultimately a matter of working hard, being smart, taking risks, having grit and determination, pushing yourself to accomplish your financial goals. conservative worldviews can be explained and understood is belief in a "just world" vs. ![]() It seems to me that one broad way liberal vs. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |