Vincent Chen, Period 7, 10/2/2023

Vincent Chen

Period 7

10/2/23

Modern Mythology 2023

Socio-political Consciousness

Looking outside the Billion-dollar skyscrapers sitting in the Empire State, lay a not-so-grandeur sight — the homeless. Clutching onto their only well-loved blanket for comfort, having sleep for dinner to fight off hunger, worrying about whether or not they can sleep in peace tonight, they are an oddity in the wealthiest city in the world. But are they the oddity or are they merely the reflection of the continued wealth divide between the so-called “elites” and the “common”? 

Elites: a select group that is superior in terms of ability or qualities to the rest of a group or society. That is the definition according to Google. Growing up, I was fed with the stories of how the “elites” were people whom we could not even dream of standing on equal ground. We shame the Indian Caste system when we have one of our own. We even glorify our caste system. The homeless as the “untouchables”, blue-collar workers as the “Shudras”, white-collar workers as the “Vaishyas”, and the elites as the “Khsatriyas” and “Brahmins”. But if they are so superior, surely they could solve the problems plaguing our Empire State, can they not? Or do they wish not to? Or is it we who wish not to? 

A few months ago, on the news, there was a story about a teen my age rationing his insulin so that his family wouldn’t go broke. While the title of the news suggests that this boy was thoughtful and clever, thinking and acting for the well-being of his family members, I did not think so. “Boy slowly killing himself because he does not want his family to go bankrupt after they cannot afford monthly medical fees.” That sounded more accurate to me. He was an American, bound to the chains of pieces of green paper, having to limit himself and not being able to enjoy his life to the fullest. Bound to the chains that the big Pharmas hold. The average house that cost $30,000 50 years ago would be now worth over a MILLION dollars. Yet following this logic, the average salary of $5,000 fifty years ago should be around $130,000 adjusted for inflation and buying power. But that is not the case. Now, even having a roof over our heads is considered a luxury, how can we ever wish to own a house? We are bound to the chains of the capitalist real estate market. How ironic it is that within the land of the free, we are indeed not free. 

“American individualism contributes to class division.” That was a recent headline that I found interesting. Is individualism contributing to class division? How can that be? Individualism is good! Not conforming is good! That’s one of the cores of the American teachings. In a capitalist country, individualism is what drives the market. I mean, it's beneficial, is it not? We have the highest GDP in the world, of the ten largest companies, eight are in the US. The world uses the dollar as the base currency. How can individualism, which goes hand-in-hand with capitalism not be beneficial? In our capitalist market, the “elites” serve as an inspiration, the example that we should all strive to achieve. So going back to my previous question, is it we who wish not to solve the wealth inequality and social problems? Yes. In a way. (Don’t kill me yet, let me explain. No, I am not an “elite”. If I am, I wouldn’t be writing this assignment right now.) We let our individualism define us too much. The teachings imprinted into us, every person for themselves, caused our divide and the situation. Does it mean that the “elites” and corporate greed do not affect us? No! But remember who is behind the corporate, and what the real identities of the “elites” are. They’re also us. They were also once us, the “common”. Even if they were born rich, that wealth came from something, if they were not “common”, then their parents were, or maybe their grandparents or great-grandparents. My point is they all started from “common”. 

However, we have since let our individualism and pride lead us astray. The conservatives are a great example. They do not wish for a more equitable society because they believe in the self-reliance and personal responsibility that individualism promotes. They argue that wealth should be earned through hard work and innovation and that government intervention in wealth redistribution stifles economic growth. But this causes the problems I mentioned to arise: being bound to the chains of capitalist greed. So am I promoting Communism? No! While there are certainly instances of corporate misconduct and exploitation, it's important to recognize that the system itself, driven by the principles of capitalism, inherently leads to wealth concentration. What I am promoting is more unity. With our current society engaged in a constant divide between those advocating for equity and those who believe in self-reliance and independence, we must come to a compromise or fight fiercely for what we stand for instead of passively accepting. 

This is where we, the new generation come in. We have been called lazy, outliers, weird, offensive, and many more. However, what the older generations do not realize is that they were the ones who caused us to become who we are. And I say, do not be ashamed of that. it is because our personalities are so bold that we have a better chance of changing our world. We are also a generation that is more willing to question traditional norms and systems, including the economic structures that have contributed to wealth inequality. By engaging in open dialogues and advocating for change, we can play a crucial role in shaping a more equitable society. We have seen the effects of passiveness, it only leads to downfall. This is a call for us to continue to stand up, not stay passive, and instead be the change that we want to see in the world. Even if we cannot see the change completely within our lifetime, let us be the bridge to a better future, handing the torch to the next generation. Let us be the ones who find the solutions that balance individualism and collective responsibility.