derrierloisirs.fr
» » What Social Classes Owe to Each Other

Download What Social Classes Owe to Each Other ePub

by William Graham Sumner

Download What Social Classes Owe to Each Other ePub
  • ISBN 1602067597
  • ISBN13 978-1602067592
  • Language English
  • Author William Graham Sumner
  • Publisher Cosimo Classics (September 1, 2007)
  • Pages 152
  • Formats mbr doc txt lit
  • Category Social Science
  • Subcategory Politics and Government
  • Size ePub 1999 kb
  • Size Fb2 1622 kb
  • Rating: 4.8
  • Votes: 798

The title of this 1883 classic of laissez-faire economics and sociology is ironic: the social classes do not, the author concludes, owe each other anything. Demolishing the theory of group obligation and fully embracing the concepts of dog-eat-dog social Darwinism, Sumner rages against the notion that the educated and wealthy have any obligation to the poor and uneducated, declares that the men should simply pull themselves out of poverty, deems taxes an obscenity and universal suffrage "immoral and vicious," dismisses the idea of "natural rights," and decries anything other than "every man for himself." A stunning evocation of modern libertarianism taken to its logical extreme, What Social Classes Owe to Each Other presents a bleak vision of contemporary industrial society... one valuable for those on all sides of the issue to understand and appreciate. American academic and author WILLIAM GRAHAM SUMNER (1840-1910) was an influential professor of sociology and politics at Yale College and president of the American Sociological Association from 1908 to 1909. He wrote numerous and varied books including Andrew Jackson as a Public Man (1882) and Folkways (1906).

William Graham Sumner (1840–1910) was a sociologist at Yale University, a historian of American banking, and .

William Graham Sumner (1840–1910) was a sociologist at Yale University, a historian of American banking, and great expositor of classical liberalism. What the Social Classes Owe to Each Other is a neglected classic, a book that will make an enormous impact on a student or anyone who has absorbed the dominant culture of victimology and political conflict. It will provoke a complete rethinking of the functioning of society and economy. Author: William Graham Sumner. William Graham Sumner was one of the founding fathers of American sociology.

William Graham Sumner (October 30, 1840 – April 12, 1910) was a classical liberal American social scientist. He taught social sciences at Yale, where he held the nation's first professorship in sociology. He was one of the most influential teachers at Yale or any other major school. In his book What Social Classes Owe to Each Other (1883), Sumner argued that the "ecclesiastical prejudice in favor of the poor and against the rich" worked "to replunge Europe into barbarism. Furthermore, Sumner asserted, that this prejudice still lives, nourished by the clergy.

Author: William Graham Sumner. Release Date: June 16, 2006 Written more than fifty years ago-in 1883-What Social Classes Owe to Each Other is even more pertinent today than at the time of its first publication. Release Date: June 16, 2006. Written more than fifty years ago-in 1883-What Social Classes Owe to Each Other is even more pertinent today than at the time of its first publication. Then the arguments and "movements" for penalizing the thrifty, energetic, and competent by placing upon them more and more of the burdens of the thriftless, lazy and incompetent, were just beginning to make headway in our country, wherein these "social reforms" now all but dominate political and so-called "social" thinking.

This 1883 book ~What Social Classes Owe Each Other~ by . This is the question William Graham Sumner poses and attempts to answer in What Do Social Classes Owe to Eachother. Sumner is often seen as the pinnacle work espousing the social Darwinism doctrine of the late 19th century. The book was originally a compilation of eleven short essays that were delivered (January 1883) in response to an invitation from Harper's Weekly.

by WILLIAM GRAHAM SUMNER professor of political and social science in. .It is commonly asserted that there are in the United States no classes, and any allusion to classes is resented.

by WILLIAM GRAHAM SUMNER professor of political and social science in yale college. Harper & brothers publishers. During the last ten years I have read a great many books and articles, especially by German writers, in which an attempt has been made to set up the State as an entity having conscience, power, and will sublimated above human limitations, and as constituting a tutelary genius over us all. I have never been able to find in history or experience anything to fit this concept.

121 quotes from William Graham Sumner: 'The critical habit of thought, if usual in society, will pervade all its . It is not at all an affair of selecting the proper class to rule. William Graham Sumner, What Social Classes Owe to Each Other. tags: liberty, social-classes.

121 quotes from William Graham Sumner: 'The critical habit of thought, if usual in society, will pervade all its mores, because it is a way of taking up the problems of life. Men educated in it cannot be stampeded by stump orators. They are slow to believe. They can hold things as possible or probable in all degrees, without certainty and without pain. They can wait for evidence and weigh evidence, uninfluenced by the emphasis or confidence with which assertions are made on one side or the other.

This is a social duty. We each owe it to the other to guarantee rights. Rights do not pertain to results, but only to chances. the legislation are kept constantly busy, by the people who have made up their minds that it is wise and conducive to happiness to live in a certain way, and who want to compel everybody else to live in their way.  The government gets its money from you to help reform society. They pertain to the conditions of the struggle for existence, not to any of the results of it; to the pursuit of happiness, not to the possession of happiness. The men who have not done their duty in this world never can be equal to those who have done their duty more or less well.

Read this book using Google Play Books app on your PC, android, iOS devices. Download for offline reading, highlight, bookmark or take notes while you read What Social Classes Owe Each Other. Laptops and Computers. You can read books purchased on Google Play using your computer's web browser. eReaders and other devices. To read on e-ink devices like the Sony eReader or Barnes & Noble Nook, you'll need to download a file and transfer it to your device. Please follow the detailed Help center instructions to transfer the files to supported eReaders.

by. Sumner, William Graham, 1840-1910.

Top. American Libraries Canadian Libraries Universal Library Community Texts Project Gutenberg Biodiversity Heritage Library Children's Library. by. Social ethics, Economics. New York and London, Harper & brothers.

What the Social Classes Owe to Each Other by William Graham. What the Social Classes Owe to Each Other. by William Graham Sumner. DIGG THIS ww. ewrockwell.

Talk about What Social Classes Owe to Each Other


Bad Sunny
No author has ever done a better job, in such a short book, of taking the bark off the socialist concepts of one social class owing anything to another. The philosophy of Sumner, who was a professor at Yale, (but a great thinker, nonetheless!) has shown up in the rhetoric of many politicians throughout this century. The Marxist idea of forced redistribution of the wealth is profoundly defeated. Every politician should be required to read this book before taking office. Sumner's caustic pen and penetrating analysis make this one of the best five I've ever read in the Annals of Freedom.
The Rollers of Vildar
easy reading
Cezel
Book is unreadable due to hundreds of strange typos, such as this one on section 1 page 3: "especially by JTgTTTrgTi Hvn'tprp|jrLwhi<?]i a,".

The book I received looks exactly like the one in the picture above* (linked below), and was published by "General Books" and says it was made via OCR software. There appears to be no quality control on the product.

* it appears my review is included for all publications which is not what I intended. Amazon will not let me link a picture from their own website, so I will describe the bad book:

Publisher General Books (generalbooks . net)

beige or light brown plain cover

words on the cover are:
What Social
Classes Owe to
Each Other

William
Graham
Sumner
Granijurus
The content of this book is fabulous. Sumner makes a very good case against humanitarianism of all shapes and sizes.

However, I would not recommend this publication. It is not sized like a regular book. It's perfectly legible, but I prefer something closer to a rectangle than a square shape.
Cordabor
The term "social Darwinism" was popularized by Richard Hofstadter's interesting 1944 book ~Social Darwinism In American Thought~ which has an entire chapter dedicated to the author now under review (William Graham Sumner). The term "social Darwinism" today is nothing more than a clever epitaph used by people to evade discussion of ideas and stifle debate (for the most part). Once invoked it congers up images of brutal savagery that coincides with terms like "survival of the fittest," (coined by H. Spencer) "nature, red tooth and claw," "Root, hog, or die." etc. So what is "social Darwinism?" In this case I will refer to the type fixated with Herbert Spencer and W. G. Sumner. That is the individualist laissez-faire social Darwinism that has associated itself with the description above and the late 19th century "survival of the fittest" capitalism that portrays imagery depicting the viciousness of a world dominated by a dog-eat-dog type individualism.

This 1883 book ~What Social Classes Owe Each Other~ by W.G. Sumner is often seen as the pinnacle work espousing the social Darwinism doctrine of the late 19th century. The book was originally a compilation of eleven short essays that were delivered (January 1883) in response to an invitation from Harper's Weekly.

I believe there is a problem with the simple depictions (as described in the first paragraph) that are often attributed to William Graham Sumner. After careful reading, what I found in Sumner's work was something more complex and different from the earlier stated attributes that have been overlooked/forgotten because of his alleged association with "social Darwinism."

One review of the book (Liberty, Capital, and the Forgotten man) has already highlighted the essential question found in the introduction which is, "What ought All-of-us to do for some-of-us? But Some-of-us are included in All-of-us, and, so far as they get the benefit of their own efforts, it is the same as if they worked for themselves, and they may be cancelled out of All-of-us. Then the question which remains is, What ought Some-of-us to do for Others-of-us? or, What do social classes owe to each other? Sumner's answer to this question is not "nothing," but something a bit more interesting. Sumner's argument is essentially that, "each owe to the other mutual redress of grievances" and that "the duty of All-of-us (that is, the State) to establish justice for all, from the least to the greatest, and in all matters," as well as that "All-of-us ought to guarantee rights to each of us." Rights for Sumner "do not pertain to result, but only to chances." Deviating from this principle to assert some social class owes something to another according to Spencer diminishes liberty and invites oligarchy, plutocracy, etc.

Sumner spends a few chapters of the book providing a detailed discussion of capital and labor. In many instances, social scientists fall into folly by developing one sided arguments when focusing on the problems of capital and labor (some focus solely on capital and others labor). Sumner goes on to argue that capital and labor are mutually dependent on each other i.e. capital needs labor and labor needs capital. (Also, for an interesting argument along the lines of capital/labor see the first paragraph in Chapter 4: On The Reasons Why Man is Not Altogether A Brute.)

The argument that Sumner was a proponent/defender of the status quo and argued that "the owners of property and capital" are "unjustly" exploited against is nothing but a fallacious argument. In this work Sumner defends labor unions calling them, "right, useful, and necessary (paraphrased)." Arguing that Sumner was against regulations of working conditions, child labor, working hours, etc. is also a misunderstanding of this work. He believed that the best results would come from the interested parties involved (laborers and their institutions) instead of government bureaucrats who have no other experience in the world, but behind a desk in a government office. He also defends the right to strike defining it as a "legitimate resort," but warned that strikes can have both beneficial and harmful effects. He recognized that there are "cases of fraud, swindling, and...financial crimes," good/bad employers/employees and that "greed and selfishness of men are perpetual." Unlike many social Darwinists who believed in human perfection via government regulations (eugenics) or natural evolution, Sumner believed in the fallibility of human beings, i.e. we humans are susceptible to "the vices and passions of human nature cupidity, lust, vindictiveness, ambition, and vanity. These vices are confined to no nation, class, or age." He argues that the remedy for such exploits is an improvement in criminal law to "meet [the] new forms of crime."

Sumner begins chapter 9 and 10 with a discussion of the forgotten man and the troubles that arise from plutocracy (which he was against). Another reviewer has already pointed out the eloquent formula of Sumner's used by the humanitarians/philanthropists that is, "A and B put their heads together to decide what C shall be made to do for D...I call C the Forgotten Man." The Forgotten Man "C" is just the typical middle class man who, "is the man who wants alcoholic liquors for any honest purpose whatsoever, who would use his liberty without abusing it, who would [be] trouble to nobody at all" who is often "passed by for the noisy, pushing, importunate, and incompetent." A and B are almost always devoid of any responsibility or pressure, while D tries to be evasive. According to Sumner, "The pressure all comes on C." In other words, those who fall under C the Forgotten Man assume all the responsibility legislated for D making their (C) own effort a struggle, etc.

So this brings me to my last two questions; What does Sumner think of charitable aid (is he the cold, heartless theorist who believe we should "Root, hog, or die?" And Who is D?

Beginning with the latter, D is often regarded as the "poor" and the "weak," however Sumner uses the terms differently than what is commonly understood. He argues that people should be on guard and "always scrutinize the terms `poor' and `weak' as used" because often the terms are combined to include the honest wage-receivers with the "negligent, shiftless, inefficient, silly, and imprudent (the drunkard, etc.)." Now Sumner also introduced a term "the pauper" to distinguish between his use of the term poor. The pauper meaning the destitute of which he states, "The paupers and the physically incapacitated are an inevitable charge on society. About them no more need be said" (~The Forgotten Man~ which was an essay/lecture on an article from the book). So D, the group targeted by the humanitarians/philanthropists to remedy "the social ills," makes up the "shiftless, negligent" drunkards etc. that Sumner argues against. Sumner goes on to argue that, "almost all legislative effort to prevent vice is really protective of vice, because all such legislation saves the vicious man from the penalty of his vice...we never can annihilate a penalty. We can only divert it from the head of the man who has incurred it to the heads of others who have not incurred it." So D in the end is not the pauper, the physically incapacitated, the unskilled laborer, etc. but the negligent, shiftless, and vicious.

Finally, we can now deal with Sumner's position on charitable aid which can be found in the last chapter entitled ~Wherefore We Should Love One Another~. "A man who had no sympathies and no sentiments would be a very poor creature" Sumner argued. He believed however that charitable work should be relegated to private relations, "where personal acquaintance and personal estimates may furnish the proper limitations and guarantees." He argues that "the public charities, more especially the legislative charities, nourish no man's sympathies and sentiments." Thus, he concludes charity should be voluntary action that builds on man's sympathies and sentiments and not be forced upon by third parties. When building his case for the necessity of charity he falls back on the fallibility of man as a prime reason. He concludes that at times, "We are all careless...Therefore the man under the tree (he opened the chapter describing a man trapped under a fallen tree) is the one of us who for the moment is smitten. It may be you tomorrow, and I next day....Men, therefore, owe to men, in the chances and perils of this life, aid and sympathy, on account of the common participation in human frailty and folly." So to conclude, I believe Sumner was far from the sentiment associated with the characterization of this work being "Root, hog, or die." Sumner regarded sympathy and aid to our fellow men as a necessary condition of human society.

Overall this book makes for an interesting read, however I would caution readers to read it CAREFULLY to understand the arguments presented in it.
BlessСhild
"What ought All-of-us to do for some-of-us? But some-of-us are included in all-of-us and, so far as they get the benefit of their own efforts, it is the same as if they worked for themselves, and tehy must be cancelled out of All-of-us. Then the question which remains is, What ought Some-of-us do for Others-of-us, or, What do social classes owe to eachother?"

This is the question William Graham Sumner poses and attempts to answer in What Do Social Classes Owe to Eachother. His answer, in brief, is that, the minute we suggest that social classes owe anything to eachother is the minute that some become the dictators of others and, by result, liberty is fractured.

Sumner starts out by championing civic liberty and the idea that all persons have an equal right to their own earnings. Tamper with this, he writes, and no matter how good the intention, some will begin to rule others. By extension, Sumner reminds us that talk about "the State" as if it is a benevolent abstraction misses the fact that "the State" - particularly in a democratic country - is just some individuals governing other individuals.

Sumner spends a good deal of time talking about the ideas of capital and labor. Capital is the means of production, and labor is the effort put forth to make capital into things we use. In Sumner's time, and in ours, there is much championing of the labor force but little championing of those who hold capital. Sumner, like Rand after, reminds us that labor needs capital to create wealth. Unlike Rand, however, Sumner reminds us taht just as much as labor needs capital, capital needs labor (in order to make it into something). For the reviewer below, who complains that Sumner is too individualistic, it is remarkable to note how many times Sumner stresses this, and similar, points: labor and capital need eachother, and the economy cannot function unless we all are doing our parts (harkening back to Adam Smith's division of labor and invisible hand.)

Lastly, Sumner talks about the "forgotten man." "The type and formula of most schemes of philanthropy or humanitarianism is this: A and B put their heads together to decide what C shall be made to do for D... I call C the Forgotten Man." While much is always made of the rich being made to give to the poor, all too often, what happens is that the rich (who are often in power) decide that the middle class will give to the poor. Therefore, those who are on the verge of bettering themselves via their own effort are forced to give to those who are not, when their money could have been used to create more wealth (by making money, buying goods, and helping others who are trying to better their lot in the process.)

In our own time, Sumner's book is a very interesting defense of economic liberty and the danger of statism and regulation. As you can see, the argument is much more philosophical than economic (whether capitalism leads to a better economy is secondary to whether it is morally justified). My biggest complaint is that the argument is somewhat myopic, and Sumner relies on rhetoric a bit too much. (Sumner does not consider the difficulties in his argument, like what to do with those who lack the ability to do for themselves do to no fault of their own, like the handicapped. A difficult moral case, which is perhaps why Sumner doesn't bring it up.)

Anyhow, this is a good read for a cogent defense of the morality of capitalism and perils of do-gooding statism.