Labor Day celebrates the hardworking men and women that made America the rich country that she is. But as America increasingly depends on her continued control of the world financial system for sustained wealth (keep issuing debts, printing paper money, and buying up foreign-made products), one can only wonder what the role of these "hard-working men and women" really is today. Evident enough, by the looks of a rusting industrial capital of Detroit and the enthusiasm new college grads have for dubiously "value"-generating sectors of investment banking and consulting, the positions of the traditional working class has been in steady decline in he this country.
Gone are the days that even a senior worker in the factory can be considered "middle class" by definition. And increasingly, their decline in social status to mere "working class" has been accompanied by increased social gap with the new middle class of professional white collars, some of which, unsurprisingly, launched their careers in the banking and consulting sectors. It is as if the two groups are now living in two completely separate societies, with no common language, interest, concerns, or even physical contact.
The social separation is becoming so established that some are even going so far as to argue that there are essential differences in personalities between the two social classes, a by-product of the different physical environments that they made their respective homes. While it is certainly true that dealing with different peoples in one's life does indeed lead to formation of distinct attitude toward life (particularly evident in the "ghettos"), the idea that one's social class can somehow determine one's personality trait is rather ludicrous.
Personality, which determines the disposition of an individual toward others, depends just as much on genetic inclinations as surrounding environments. Naturally, humans are inborn with a certain balance of affinity for interaction with the surroundings. Unless there are strong external influences (domestic violence, psychological shock, etc.), it is difficult to make a person more extroverted than he or she is "made to be" by the functioning of the lobes responsible for speech and emotions in the brain.
Although the prospect of being raised in a tight-with-money blue collar families sounds like the "strong negative external influence" to change all working class children's personalities for the worse, the reality cannot support the logic. Ironically, it is precisely because there are increasingly little interaction and common language between the white and blue collar segments of the society that the blue collar children's personality would not be affected by the living standards and conditions of (somewhat) poverty.
The logic works as follows. The dominating trait of personality, as previously stated, is extroversion vs. introversion. Talkativeness, especially among strangers, is determined by one's self-confidence relative to others present. Self-confidence can certainly be affected by how well one's life is as compared to others. While it is obviously true that white collars have higher standards of living, working class children are increasingly unlikely to come in contact with white collars until after their formative years (say, about the end of middle school), so there would never be a chance for their self-confidence to decrease from vain comparison with these "richer" kids.
The isolated working class microcosm should have a random distribution of different personalities just as an isolated middle class microcosm will. The change in personality from external factors of "nurture," such as income and the resulting standard of living, will have no effect in either of these two groups as obvious wealth gaps will not be perceived except in very rare cases of mixed communities of working and middle class residents. The genetic dispositions of personality ("nature") will take its full course in shaping personalities of each individual in either social class.
And last by not least, as a side point, it is also important to note that social mobility, even in the increasingly class-conscious society of today, still exists. If we assume that a person's personality can only change slightly and superficially after his or her formative years, then as the person move across social classes, even the so-called "working class" personalities can exist in middle class, and vice versa. Rigidity of personalities within fluidity of social class movements can easily nullify any appearance of correlation between the two...
Gone are the days that even a senior worker in the factory can be considered "middle class" by definition. And increasingly, their decline in social status to mere "working class" has been accompanied by increased social gap with the new middle class of professional white collars, some of which, unsurprisingly, launched their careers in the banking and consulting sectors. It is as if the two groups are now living in two completely separate societies, with no common language, interest, concerns, or even physical contact.
The social separation is becoming so established that some are even going so far as to argue that there are essential differences in personalities between the two social classes, a by-product of the different physical environments that they made their respective homes. While it is certainly true that dealing with different peoples in one's life does indeed lead to formation of distinct attitude toward life (particularly evident in the "ghettos"), the idea that one's social class can somehow determine one's personality trait is rather ludicrous.
Personality, which determines the disposition of an individual toward others, depends just as much on genetic inclinations as surrounding environments. Naturally, humans are inborn with a certain balance of affinity for interaction with the surroundings. Unless there are strong external influences (domestic violence, psychological shock, etc.), it is difficult to make a person more extroverted than he or she is "made to be" by the functioning of the lobes responsible for speech and emotions in the brain.
Although the prospect of being raised in a tight-with-money blue collar families sounds like the "strong negative external influence" to change all working class children's personalities for the worse, the reality cannot support the logic. Ironically, it is precisely because there are increasingly little interaction and common language between the white and blue collar segments of the society that the blue collar children's personality would not be affected by the living standards and conditions of (somewhat) poverty.
The logic works as follows. The dominating trait of personality, as previously stated, is extroversion vs. introversion. Talkativeness, especially among strangers, is determined by one's self-confidence relative to others present. Self-confidence can certainly be affected by how well one's life is as compared to others. While it is obviously true that white collars have higher standards of living, working class children are increasingly unlikely to come in contact with white collars until after their formative years (say, about the end of middle school), so there would never be a chance for their self-confidence to decrease from vain comparison with these "richer" kids.
The isolated working class microcosm should have a random distribution of different personalities just as an isolated middle class microcosm will. The change in personality from external factors of "nurture," such as income and the resulting standard of living, will have no effect in either of these two groups as obvious wealth gaps will not be perceived except in very rare cases of mixed communities of working and middle class residents. The genetic dispositions of personality ("nature") will take its full course in shaping personalities of each individual in either social class.
And last by not least, as a side point, it is also important to note that social mobility, even in the increasingly class-conscious society of today, still exists. If we assume that a person's personality can only change slightly and superficially after his or her formative years, then as the person move across social classes, even the so-called "working class" personalities can exist in middle class, and vice versa. Rigidity of personalities within fluidity of social class movements can easily nullify any appearance of correlation between the two...
Comments
Post a Comment