FREE ESSAY ON AMERICA: THE MYTH OF EQUALITY

AMERICA: THE MYTH OF EQUALITY

America
The Myth of Equality
To many, the Unites States serves as the ideal model of democracy for the modern world.
Yet, how truly worthy is America of this status? Although it has been said that,
"Equality is as American as baseball, hot dogs, and apple pie," one must be extremely
critical when analyzing such a statement. By taking a historical perspective to the
question of how "equal" American equality actually is, it is simple to recognize how
problematic the "Land of the Free" mentality can be. The early America's most prominent
thinkers have been sensationalized and given credit for developing a free and equal
system. However, one can recognize that their manner of thinking was far from this idea
of "all men are created equal" by critical examination of their literature. 
When analyzing equality, a sociological and legal approach must be made. In the case of
the United States, the sociological stratification, or division of power, of minority
groups had adversely affected the development of the legal system. Especially in the
1600s and 1700s, legal and social equality of those not of the Caucasian persuasion, the
less fortunate, and of the female gender was almost nonexistent. This inequality is a
direct result of the early American society's ranking system. Equality was not perceived
in the minds of such individuals as John Winthrop, John Adams, and James Madison, and as
a result, their significant accomplishments towards the development of the American
system have tainted the institution itself. 
One of the earliest American social groups was the 17th Century Puritans. This society
had an extremely unique and strict manner of thinking that was entirely based on
inequality. This is clearly represented by the writings of the Puritan leader John
Winthrop. In "A Model of Christian Charity," Winthrop outlines the societal rationale,
and in turn, the disparity of equality in his society. The gist of the Puritan way of
life is that, by the grace of God, certain individuals were empowered with the ability to
be enlightened and the capability of achieving much within the society itself. However,
by the same reasoning, some individuals were also destined to take the lesser roles in
society, and as a result, had no power to move up within the ranks because of this
inescapable predetermination. This is represented by the following Winthrop passage: "God
Almighty…..hath so disposed of the condition of mankind as in all times some must
be rich, some poor; some high and eminent in power and dignity, others mean and in
subjection" (Winthrop, 79). To further inequality, Winthrop stressed the need for each to
take their place for the good of society: 
"…hold conformity with the rest of His (God's) works, being delighted to show forth
the glory of His wisdom in the variety and difference of the creatures and the glory of
His power, in ordering all these differences for the preservation and good of the whole"
(Winthrop, 79).
The Puritans did not believe in equality, and any problems resulting from this mindset
was silenced by Winthrop's pleads for those unhappy souls, assigned by the Almighty to be
subordinate, to take their place for the preservation of society.
Although inequalities may not been less evident later on in the 1700s, societal
stratification was a factor during the formation of the American political system. One
leader at this time was the nation's second president, John Adams. Previous to the
release of the Declaration of Independence in 1776, which Adams had a significant role in
developing, a set of correspondences between Adams and his wife, Abigail, show readers
the role of women during this age. Abigail wrote to her husband suggesting that the
Declaration of Independence be modified to include provisions for increasing women's
rights (Adams, 65). John Adams' response to this letter is incredibly grating: 
"As to your extraordinary Code of Laws, I cannot but laugh. We have been told that our
Struggle has loosened the bands of Government everywhere. That Children and Apprentices
were disobedient - that schools and Colledges were grown turbulent - that Indians
slighted their Guardians and Negros grew insolent to their Masters. But your letter was
the first Intimation that another Tribe more numerous and powerful then all the rest were
grown discontented" (Adams, 66). 
Adams goes further to say his wife's ideas were a result of her "saucy" personality
(Adams, 66). Not only was this "Founding Father" clearly sexist, but he also saw minority
groups as lessors. This, however, is not taught in the history books. Popular knowledge
is that Adams devoted his life to politics, participating with distinction first in the
revolutionary activities of Boston and Philadelphia, and later in the founding of the
republic. 
At the time the Constitution was being analyzed for possible ratification, a set of
published writings proved to be invaluable support toward the future framework for the
American "democratic" governmental system. The Federalist Papers, written by James
Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay, helped change the tide toward support for
ratification. Although these individuals have been credited with the formation of this
free and equal system for which America prides itself, one must question whether they had
any alternative motives in forming this particular system. 
In Federalist Paper No. 10, James Madison details his thoughts on how dangerous factions
can be towards the future form of government. In actuality, Madison says that almost
nothing is more important in this proposed system is, "its tendency to break and control
the violence of faction" (Madison, 107). Later, in Madison's Federalist No. 51, he
describes how the Constitution's separation of powers clauses are invaluable because it
makes domination by such "factions" virtually impossible. Yet, whom is Madison depicting
by the term "factions?" He writes in No. 10 that:
"By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or
minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or
of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate
interests of the community," (Madison, 108).
This is quite an ambiguous definition. However, if one were examines the backgrounds of
those who wrote the Federalist Papers and of those who developed the Constitution, it is
very clear who they were trying to protect the government from. 
Madison was born to a large slave-holding family in the estate of Montpelier, Virginia.
After graduating from Princeton, he rose through the ranks of Virginian politics until he
was selected to represent the state in the Continental Congress
(http://www.jmu.edu/madison /madisonb.htm). Madison was no common vagrant. He was born
into power, money, and a good education, which at the time, was the typical stereotype of
the American politician. As a result, it was the goals and aspirations of this group that
were manifested in the initial American system. The factions that Madison concerns
himself with were the population's majority, otherwise known as the lesser classes. As a
result, the establishment of division of power and checks and balances clauses would give
the populace a lesser chance of gaining much authority over the already established
aristocracy. 
If this is the case, why is America perceived to be relatively fair and equal today?
Fortunately the early American politicians did develop framework to allow the
Constitution to evolve, and combined with the political movements in both minority and
women's rights of the end of this century, much of this unjust stigma has been eliminated
from the system. Still, racial discrepancies in the courts occur more frequently then
not, and the social makeup of American politicians continues to follow a predetermined
"mold." Is this a direct result of the discrepancies formed in the earlier stages of
American history? It is hard for anyone to tell. What is indisputable is that the
Declaration of Independence's statement, "All men are created equal," was far from the
truth during early American history.