Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
Introduction
The disadvantaged position of specific population groups is a critical issue in the present-day world, which stems from the initially established relationships between them. In other words, in the past, the fact of belonging to these categories of citizens, living in less favorable conditions than their peers, was directly linked to their origin and race. Even though at present, the situation seems to have significantly improved, the challenge of earning ones place in the world remains. Hence, the historical tendencies do not allow to overcome the previously existing barriers for new generations. In this paper, I will prove that in a capitalistic society, ones background and personal characteristics determine wealth, as in Dear Marcus: A Letter to the Man Who Shot Me and The Jungle.
Wealth in Dear Marcus and The Jungle
In the selected literary works, there is a number of similar recurring themes, which allow to ensure the dependency of ones financial wellbeing on their background, and one of them is the characters original status. From this perspective, the chances for a better life for both Jerry McGill from Dear Marcus: A Letter to the Man Who Shot Me and Jurgis Rudkus from The Jungle are significantly limited by it. Thus, for instance, in his narrative, Jerry implicitly mentions that race played a critical role in his ultimate position after the shooting incident. He claims that the case of a thirteen-year-old black kid on the Lower East Side is not an event, which is widely covered by media (McGill 15). From his point of view, being just little Jerome is not the same as a Kennedy or a Rockefeller or even a Cosby (McGill 15). These provisions mean that his troubles are mainly determined by the fact of belonging to a poor family, and by discussing it, the author confirms that the attitudes towards a person depend on his status.
Similarly, Jurgis from The Jungle speaks about the struggles in his life after moving to the United States by emphasizing the significance of being an immigrant in the country. For his wife and him, the mans job of a meatpacking worker is associated with substantial limitations to the potential acquisition of wealth in the long run, making their situation permanent. Since this work relegated to a vulnerable immigrant population is one of the attributes of the population group the family belongs to, it demonstrates the way capitalism hides its bloodied foundations (Sinclair 21). In this case, the impossibility of improvements for Jurgis is of the same nature as that of Jerry as it is defined by their initial conditions and not particular talents or achievements. Since a capitalistic society is the environment, which historically prioritizes the needs of the privileged citizens and their corporations, the adversities in the future for these two characters are inevitable under the current system.
Even though peoples life circumstances might differ, and race and immigrant status are not the only issues, placing them in the lower end of the wealth spectrum, the overall mechanism remains the same. The workers, whose background is not favorable for their promotion, are in service of those, having access to the majority of resources, and their unequal distribution in society correlates with historically established social relationships. Moreover, the exacerbation of the problems of the former individuals is conditional upon the general world trends in economies. For instance, Floyd claims that global trading as a part of the economy of the United States, increasing its wealth, is under continuously increasing pressure (613). Due to the growing uncertainty within trading blocs, caused by the presence of numerous actors in business, employees are likely to be presented with greater workload and worse conditions (Floyd 613). For Jurgis and Jerry, these events would mean higher levels of stress because of the need to increase their social utility.
Another aspect, contributing to the stance that ones circumstances are more crucial in determining the level of financial capacity, is the access to services, and both Jurgis and Jerry suffered from its disruptions. For both characters, these issues were explicitly connected to the lack or poor quality of rendered healthcare assistance, and in both cases, they led to tragic outcomes. In the situation of Jerry, the main problem was the help he was provided with after the shooting incident. By addressing the shooter, he states that we both know that an ambulance dont come to the hood unless something serious is going down, and this claim confirms that doctors usually neglect these peoples needs (McGill 15). By saying that life is not always fair. For people like us its easy to get mired in resentment and ugly jealousies, Jerry refers to the impossibility of changes (McGill 23). Since, as per the story, one can rely only on themselves in similar occasions, their wealth cannot be guaranteed with the neglect of the government, prioritizing well-off citizens.
The experience of Jurgis and his family is no different from that of Jerry as they face numerous challenges related to their opportunities to attain health and continue to work to be able to prosper. In the novel, the man compares his situation with his sprained ankle to mechanized killing & from the killing done by the hunter who pits his wits against those of his prey (Sinclair 22). The gloomy thoughts are enhanced by the fact that he eventually loses his job as no guarantees are given to those who do not have enough money and need to work all the time (Sinclair 134). The lack of responsibility for the lives and physical wellbeing of immigrants of the past was a common challenge, and for the main character, it was complemented by the loss of his wife during childbearing (Sinclair 213). In all these events, only finances could help, but they were scarce to non-existent, and the people were doomed to meet a tragic end. In this way, their lives limitations were also determined by the initially disadvantaged position in society as opposed to personal efforts.
The discussed examples from the lives of Jerry and Jurgis show that, regardless of the nature of their struggles, their restricted access to healthcare services and poor outcomes of interventions are inevitable. They are linked to the fact of belonging to vulnerable population groups, which is black people for the former and immigrant workers for the latter, and this circumstance defines their low chances for wellbeing. In these two cases, the historical development of a capitalistic society led to the emergence of a gap between these categories of citizens and their wealthy peers. This standpoint is supported by Sell, who writes that financialized capitalism and trade, intangibles and global value chains are the reason for similar disparities (1). In other words, no high-quality healthcare assistance can be guaranteed to some groups, and this provision allows concluding on the adverse effects of the system, stemming from peoples backgrounds.
The final consideration, deriving from unfavorable personal circumstances, correlating with increased risks in terms of financial wellbeing, is the fact that capitalism creates a threat to citizens by distinguishing neighborhoods and treating their inhabitants differently. For Jerry from Dear Marcus: A Letter to the Man Who Shot Me, it was the idea that his shooter must have been either black or Latino as they were the only people, living in the area (McGill 14). By saying Im going to go ahead and make you black. I have the power now, he confirms the role of race in the described events (McGill 14). By doing so, he also seems to unconsciously draw the line between wealthy white citizens and others with fewer chances for a higher financial status. For Jerry, the sun was more favorable to Manhattan than it was to Brooklyn, and this statement is an explicit manifestation of capitalism in life (McGill 19). In other words, ones place of residence is one of the conditions, related more to peoples background rather than personal efforts.
For Jurgis from The Jungle, the influence of his location on the future chances for a better quality of living conditions was also critical, and it was connected to his occupation. In the novel, he reflects on the fact that he stood as much chance of getting a job in Packingtown as of being chosen mayor of Chicago (Sinclair 216). This part demonstrates the contrast between different cities and their varying degree of favorability in terms of prosperity. In addition, the comparison of meatpackers and mayors contributes to the idea that the lives of people with corresponding societal statuses is significantly influenced by how they earn the living. From this perspective, moving to Chicago seems an optimal solution for changing the mans lifestyle and gaining more opportunities for career promotion, whereas this illusion is promptly dispelled (Sinclair 22). Therefore, despite having a similar job, a place clearly matters for Jurgis, whereas the futility of his efforts shows the impossibility of making a change under capitalism.
In both cases, the dependency of ones financial status within the system on the mens desire to shift to a higher class was one of the principal recurring themes, which is aligned with living conditions. According to Markley et al., various factors, such as homeownership, correlate with race, places of residence, and unequal access to resources as a result of the co-formation of white identity and property law (312). From this point of view, Jerry and Jurgis are the representatives of the population groups, who are doomed to struggle with the above issues due to their background.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the historical overview of the correlation between ones personal circumstances and financial status under capitalism proves that wealth is clearly determined by individuals origin. First, race and an immigrants position are the main obstacles to the wellbeing of Jerry and Jurgis from the examined literary works, and they define an adverse outcome for both mens pursuits. Second, the lack of equality in accessing healthcare for them compared to white people born in the United States is obvious, and it contributes to the specified challenge. Third, the idea of good and bad neighborhoods, linked to residents wealth, has roots in the period when citizens could not make a shift by moving to other places and failed to change their lifestyle. Thus, the oppression of individuals is caused by initial living conditions and complicated by personal factors.
Works Cited
Floyd, David. Assessing Why the Increased Capitalist Global Trading Environment is Under Pressure: What Are the Prospects for More Stability Returning in the Near Future? Strategic Change, vol. 29, no. 6, 2020, pp. 613-615. doi: 10.1002/jsc.2369
Markley, Scott N., et al. The Limits of Homeownership: Racial Capitalism, Black Wealth, and the Appreciation Gap in Atlanta. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 44, no. 2, 2020, pp. 310-328. doi: 10.1111/1468-2427.12873
McGill, Jerry. Dear Marcus: A Letter to the Man Who Shot Me. Spiegel & Grau, 2012.
Sell, Susan K. 21st-Century Capitalism: Structural Challenges for Universal Health Care. Globalization and Health, vol. 15, no. 1, 2019, pp. 1-9. doi: 10.1186/s12992-019-0517-3
Sinclair, Upton. The Jungle. See Sharp Press, 1906.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.