Social Inequality and Minorities in

Social Inequality and Minorities in the U.S. There are many types of inequalities in our societal structural: racial, wealth, structural, economic, and social. Most of these are linked in one way or another, particularly social and economic inequality. And within social inequality lie several distinct areas such as property rights, freedom of speech, levels of health care, education, and voting rights. Social inequality then is simply an area or areas of society where certain groups do not have equal access or equal status.

Social and economic inequality are closely linked because it is often lack of financial capability that causes inequities in the other areas mentioned above. In other words, it may be strictly economic or financial factors that cause social inequalities in the area of health care or education. The U.S. Government Dept. Of Veteran's Affairs (2009) defines a minority as "the smaller part of a group.

A group within a country or state that differs in race, religion, or national origin from the dominant group." It further breaks minorities down into four specific groups: American Indian or Alaskan native, Asian or Pacific Islander, Black, and Hispanic. Other groups, such as women, are not classified as minorities, but they are considered as having "minority status" in the eyes of the law (Office of Diversity and Inclusion, 2009). Proposition "Today, if you are born poor, you will grow up to be poor" (Arrighi, 2001, p.

3) Noting the date of this statement, one can readily see that social inequality in its economic and financial form, is alive and well in the U.S. Exceptions exist of course, but not many. And it is not as if any intelligent adult denies the existence of social inequalities as they apply to minorities. Drive through any mid-size city in the U.S. And it is evident as you pass from the estates to the slums what you are seeing. It is social inequality.

and, 100% of the time who abides in the lesser areas of the city? Usually, it is the minorities -- Blacks, Hispanics, etc. It is no secret. There is no magic to it. Social inequality coexists with the minority. It has been, is and always will be the same. That is precisely what Arrighi (2001)as well as Doran (2005) and many others are saying. Why? That question should be answered.

Why does it have to be that way? What causes social inequality? The answers are not simple; the solutions are difficult to grasp; and the reality is frustrating. Doran (2005) says this: "...social inequality will continue to exist and negatively affect our society via the ascribed status of selected individuals." There is part of the why. Ascribed status, according to Doran, is "that status an individual inherits at birth, and thus has no control over" (Doran, 2005, p. 2).

And the ones who maintain the "social power" hold on to it by discriminating against those of lower ascribed status. That is not to say that social inequality does not change and progress for minority groups. Again, we can see the progress for women, as an example, over time as their "ascribed status" changed and improved -- with a lot of hard work, frustration, and about 150 years of work. Blacks in America are better off in 2009 that they were in 1959. Financially, educationally, and socially, things have improved for them.

That is true of Hispanics as well. I think all of that is general knowledge today. However, is it that social inequality is going away and minorities no longer have to concern themselves with their ascribed status? No. What happens over time is that the inequality affects different groups at different times. and, for any particular minority group, the inequality "shifts" but never goes away from any particular group.

Look, for example, at the history of the American native Indian, Blacks, and even Irish-Americans at different times in our country's history. In the 1830s-1850s, Irish-Americans, simply because they were Catholic and "peasants," were discriminated against at every turn and in every way. They were always placed in the lowest skilled jobs, lived in the worst areas, and were paid less than any other worker. This went on for all of the middle 19th century until attention was turned to the Italians, or Greeks, or Polish immigrants (Doran, 2005, p. 3).

And the key to this social inequality is that the "discrimination" is always based on something the minority can't change. Think about it. Blacks have been discriminated against because of the color of their skin, not because they are less intelligent, less educated, less skillful, or less talented. Native American Indians felt social inequality due also to the color of their skin, but as well to the fact that they fought back against those who were invading their land.

Could they have changed those things? Catholics have been discriminated against as recently as the 1960s simply because the Pope is head of their church -- not because of what they believe, but simply because of the fear that a Pope in Rome could control a President in Washington D.C. And on and on it goes. Jonathon Kozol (1996) wrote a book called Amazing Grace: The Lives of Children and the Conscience of a Nation.

For three years, he visited New York's South Bronx focusing on the poor neighborhood of Mott Haven populated by 2/3 Hispanic and 1/3 Black. He interviewed teachers, ministers, drug pushers, children, parents and many others. He takes us into rat-infested homes, dirty and overcrowded schools, medical clinics with no doctors, and the main source of nutrition -- soup kitchens. The point, for purposes of this paper, is that Kozol points specifically to "systemic discrimination," hopelessness, and purposely limited economic opportunities for this "ascribed status" community in the U.S.

In the 20th century. Manhattan is the seventh richest congressional district in the nation. The outlying area is Mott Haven. His point, and ours, is the same as Doran's -- that the social inequality against minorities will never change because we accept that it exists. Luxury grocers just south of Mott Haven advertise their willingness to make deliveries anywhere except Mott Haven, and even McDonalds announces home delivery -- with the.