“It is the mind, not society, that forges the manacles that keep people enchained to their misfortunes.” - Life At The Bottom
As we near the 2020 Presidential election, the political rhetoric over the gap between the rich and the poor is sure to surface. A go-to strategy of the Democrat party, inequality is a perfect scheme to sell their victimhood narrative. Their remedy is always easy, simply take more money from the rich and give it to the poor. If only the solution were this simple. But all poverty is not the same. Some people are poor because they lack money. But this kind of poverty can and often is overcome. Yet, there is another class of people, who are also poor, not just due to a lack of money, but a lack in character. These are the underclass, a term that was first used in the early 1960s to describe the unemployed and the unemployable. Today the underclass is mostly identifiable by a belief that their situation is beyond their control. And while poverty is a money problem, the difficulties faced by the underclass are largely in their heads.
The underclass is often a collection of bored, indifferent, and dysfunctional adults. Their behavior is frequently destructive, abusive, and violent. Many are illiterate, have drug problems, and lead lives of crime. These individuals do not function normally, are ignorant of the ways of life, and are generally irresponsible. They rarely work, and when they do, they do not hold jobs for long. Their problems are mental, emotional, and spiritual as much as they are economic. The underclass languishes at the very bottom of society, one rung below the working poor. No longer in control of their lives, they are always looking for someone or something to blame.
Since there is an absence of moral standards in the lives of the underclass, the laws of society are often ignored. Convinced that they are unequal because of injustice, stealing is merely a taking back of what was already theirs. Criminals, instead, are the real victims, and crime is nothing more than a protest against inequality and a form of redistribution without the middleman.
JD Vance, in his biography, Hillbilly Elegy, talks about a learned helplessness that results when chronic failure makes one feel powerless over their life. Thus, the choices they make are not responsible for the negative consequences that result. Vance grew up in Appalachia where the underclass is predominately white and is often known as hillbillies, rednecks, and white trash. Vance describes the anger and resentment, the helpless poverty, and drug addiction of its inhabitants. These conditions are often the result of broken homes, cities in decay, and unemployment. Problems associated with the underclass tend to start in the home and grow larger from a lack of social connections.
Before the Industrial Revolution, an individual’s social status was determined by a caste system. If you were born of an aristocrat, you were an aristocrat. If you were born of a bootman, you were a bootman. There was little possibility for any other outcome. After the Industrial Revolution, individuals had significant control over their futures for the first time. But this kind of freedom required a considerable level of responsibility, that not everyone welcomed.
In Theodore Dalrymple’s 2001 book, “Life at The Bottom”, Dalrymple, through a collection of essays, reveals the dysfunctions of the white underclass he served while a physician and psychiatrist in an English hospital and prison. Dalrymple recounts his experiences in several vignettes detailing the lives, actions, and outcomes of those living in the worst of situations.
Dalrymple is quick to condemn academia for their role in creating and sustaining the underclass. In the UK and America, academics were the first to dismiss increases in crime rates and blame society, not the criminal for their actions. In education, they recommended the lowering of standards to improve test scores. Welfare policies that removed fathers from homes and devalued marriage also have their roots in the ivory towers. They destigmatized illegitimacy, dismissed judgment over one’s behavior, and removed economic responsibility for parenting. In a rush to free couples from repressive Victorian ideas of sexuality, they ushered in an era of damaging immorality. The results have been devastating. These intellectuals and their liberal policies made the underclass possible. And their interference has made every problem worse.
To understand how the rich, get rich, and the poor stay poor, we must examine the role government policies and institutions play in affecting behavior. Unfortunately, there are very few shortcuts to fortune. Hard work and the constant refining of one’s talents are generally necessary to achieve success. Redistributing the hard-fought wealth of the well-to-do can never erase the real disparities.
Comments