When the poet Frances Scott Key saw the American flag gusting in the wind atop Fort McHenry in 1814, he was so in awe of what it represented that he crafted what would eventually become America’s national anthem, The Start Spangled Banner (Smithsonian). His lyrics eloquently illustrated the pride of an evolving nation and the resilience of the American flag, which served as the most exalted symbol of nationalism and civic pride. Two hundred years later, his brief moment of inspiration still provides Americans and potential immigrants in search of the American dream, hope and belief, that the United States is a land where dreams are fulfilled and freedom is everlasting. However, close examination of Key’s lyrics reveals an ironic paradigm shift
…show more content…
He writes, “O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave” (Smithsonian) When interpreting this lyric, it is easy to assume that Keys might have been consumed with the fate of his nation due to the War of 1812. Still, this noteworthy question mark, behind the abstract thought of a free land, leaves plentiful opportunity to connect it to the historical plight of many Americans whose freedom is as illusory as that question mark; citizens like the millions of prisoners in the United States. In the 2010 United States census, the Census Bureau confirmed that there were 2.3 million prisoners in America (Washington Post). This number seems relatively small when compared to the 321.9 million people in the country overall (Census Bureau). But comparing these two numbers is not a means to understand population growth or the different social positions of Americans. It is to question why, in this land of opportunity, are so many Americans in prison and to recognize what possibly led them there and who benefits as a …show more content…
Marx argued that the bourgeoisie controlled the means of production, wage labour and amassed majority of the wealth as a result, which equated to the power to dominate and define society. The opposing end, the proletariat, were constantly oppressed and left alienated because they maintained no power or ability to rectify their position within society. In addition, specifically within a capitalistic society, there was no opportunity for a meritocracy; so even if the proletariats were highly skilled, they remained pigeonholed with no chance for social mobility without a direct shift within the economic structure of society. When examining this multifarious relationship, Marx asserted in the Manifesto of the Communist Party, “The modern bourgeoisie society that has sprouted from the ruins of feudal society has not done away with class antagonisms. It has but established new classes, new conditions of oppression, new forms of struggle in place of the old ones” (Marx.) To repurpose this quote as a means to understand contemporary society, we can view the very specific categories within the American pecuniary class system that ultimate defines ones position and significance in the economic and at times, political sphere of the country. The New York Times reported that the Koch
He writes, “O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave” (Smithsonian) When interpreting this lyric, it is easy to assume that Keys might have been consumed with the fate of his nation due to the War of 1812. Still, this noteworthy question mark, behind the abstract thought of a free land, leaves plentiful opportunity to connect it to the historical plight of many Americans whose freedom is as illusory as that question mark; citizens like the millions of prisoners in the United States. In the 2010 United States census, the Census Bureau confirmed that there were 2.3 million prisoners in America (Washington Post). This number seems relatively small when compared to the 321.9 million people in the country overall (Census Bureau). But comparing these two numbers is not a means to understand population growth or the different social positions of Americans. It is to question why, in this land of opportunity, are so many Americans in prison and to recognize what possibly led them there and who benefits as a …show more content…
Marx argued that the bourgeoisie controlled the means of production, wage labour and amassed majority of the wealth as a result, which equated to the power to dominate and define society. The opposing end, the proletariat, were constantly oppressed and left alienated because they maintained no power or ability to rectify their position within society. In addition, specifically within a capitalistic society, there was no opportunity for a meritocracy; so even if the proletariats were highly skilled, they remained pigeonholed with no chance for social mobility without a direct shift within the economic structure of society. When examining this multifarious relationship, Marx asserted in the Manifesto of the Communist Party, “The modern bourgeoisie society that has sprouted from the ruins of feudal society has not done away with class antagonisms. It has but established new classes, new conditions of oppression, new forms of struggle in place of the old ones” (Marx.) To repurpose this quote as a means to understand contemporary society, we can view the very specific categories within the American pecuniary class system that ultimate defines ones position and significance in the economic and at times, political sphere of the country. The New York Times reported that the Koch