Classlessness in America ¨è

185-2-838
Anyone who does commit the solecism of talking or writing about class in America is assailed at once by a problem of definition. Asking Americans which class they belong to does not get you very far, since almost all Americans are sure that they belong to the middle. The last time the Pew Research Centre asked, in a poll in 2008, 91% of respondents put themselves in the upper-middle, middle or lower-middle class. Confusion about class is compounded by America¡¯s habit of defining the white ¡°working class¡± not by income or occupation, as in Europe, but by the lack of a college degree. That is a pretty odd approach (Mark Twain observed that cauliflower is cabbage with a college education) given that many workers without a degree earn a decent income and consider themselves part of the middle too.
American talk about class differs from Europe¡¯s in another way. The country does not have a broad political movement on the left. Its trade unions never gave rise to a social-democratic party like Britain¡¯s Labour, for example. This is not to say that America has had no left at all. It has seen radicals galore. But Michael Kazin, co-editor of Dissent and author of a new history (¡°American Dreamers¡±), says its left did not focus chiefly on economic issues. From the mid-20th century, after all, America seemed to find a way for manual workers with only a high-school education to enjoy a middle-class lifestyle. The New Left of the 1960s and 1970s assumed (times have changed) that growth would take care of economic needs and devoted its energies to racial and sexual equality instead. The left has contributed to terrific success in such areas—from the abolition of slavery to the formal end this week of the ban on gays serving openly in the military. But Mr Kazin concludes that it was far more successful when it sought to expand personal liberty than when it struggled to advance the collective might of workers and the poor.


A. ¾îÈÖ
commit ¶°¸Ã´Ù, ¹üÇÏ´Ù. solecism ÷òÌ«(ÆÄ°Ý), ¹®¹ýÀ§¹Ý, ºÎÀû´ç.
assail ØíÍô(¸Í°ø)ÇÏ´Ù. definition ïÒì¡(Á¤ÀÇ). Pew ±³È¸ÀÇ ãáÓù(½Åµµ) Á¼®, ÀÇÀÚ.
compound ¹ø°Å·Ó°Ô ÇÏ´Ù, ÇÕ¼ºÇÏ´Ù. occupation Á÷¾÷.
odd Ðôì¶(±âÀÌ)ÇÑ. given=if it is given ...À» °í·ÁÇØ º»´Ù¸é.
on the left ÁÂÆÄ ÂÊ¿¡¼­. trade unions ³ëµ¿Á¶ÇÕ. radicals ±ÞÁøºÐÀÚ, ±ÞÁøÁÂÆÄ.
galore dzºÎÇϰÔ. Dissent ¹Ý´ë, Úãô÷ð¤(¹ÝüÁ¦). manual workers À°Ã¼³ëµ¿ÀÚ.
racial ÀÎÁ¾ÀûÀÎ. contribute Ðöæ¨(±â¿©)ÇÏ´Ù. terrific ±²ÀåÇÑ.
abolition ÆóÁö. formal °ø½ÄÀûÀÎ. ban ±ÝÁö. collective Áý´ÜÀûÀÎ.
might Èû.
  • Æ®À§ÅÍ
  • ÆäÀ̽ººÏ
  • ¡èÀ§·Î
Copyright ¨Ï Á¶°©Á¦´åÄÄ - ¹«´ÜÀüÀç ¹× Àç¹èÆ÷ ±ÝÁö
´ñ±Û´Þ±â ´ñ±Û¾²±â ÁÖÀÇ»çÇ×

´ñ±Û´Þ±â´Â ·Î±×ÀÎÈÄ »ç¿ëÇÏ½Ç ¼ö ÀÖÀ¸¸ç, ³»¿ëÀº 100ÀÚ À̳»·Î Àû¾îÁֽʽÿÀ. ±¤°í, ¿å¼³, ºñ¼Ó¾î, ÀνŰø°Ý°ú ÇØ´ç ±Û°ú °ü·Ã ¾ø´Â ±ÛÀº »çÀüÅ뺸¾øÀÌ »èÁ¦µË´Ï´Ù.

PC ¹öÀü