In her final evaluation of her experience working as a low-wage earner, Ehrenreich states a number of interesting and provocative conclusions. Here’s one that I imagine may have gotten many of your attention, and I’m curious to elicit your response.
As she reflects on why low-wage workers behave the way they do—that is, not as “free agents within a capitalist democracy”—she writes that “it is because they dwell in a place that is neither free nor in any way democratic” (210). She continues: “When you enter the low-wage workplace—and many of the medium-wage workplaces as well—you check your civil liberties at the door … We can hardly pride ourselves on being the world’s preeminent democracy, after all, if large numbers of citizens spend half their waking hours in what amounts, in plain terms, to a dictatorship” (210).
What do you think of this passage? Do you agree with Ehrenreich? Why or why not? What role do you think her book—as a form of research—plays in making our country more democratic?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This passage is very pointed and critical. I think it strikes an emotion or response in every reader that makes them question not only low-wage workers and the workplace, but the current system in the United States. However, I do not agree with Barabara and this passage. Although in some senses, the low-wage workplace could appear as a dictatorship, it is a job, and at every job there is a boss and rules to follow. Low-wage workers are not the only ones who have to report to higher authority or follow day-to-day procedures. Ehrenreich, however, does a good job of concluding her her research and observations as a whole through this bigger picture passage that clearly demonstrates her opinion and side on the matter. As for her book making the coutry more democratic, I don't believe it has a direct cause and effect relationship, but it does perhaps draw attention to the low-wage lifestyle and the environment in which a great portion of the population exists. By creating such a strong image and pointing the finger, it gets people talking and paying attention to the issue, which might possibly alter the future of our country and its democratic ways.
ReplyDeleteEhrenreich makes a very interesting point when she compares the low-wage and medium-wage workplaces to a dictatorship, and it is a point that I agree wholly with. It makes sense to compare it to a dictatorship because the workers have no say in what goes on. They don’t have any say in their pay, what they do while they work and in many instances, they don’t have a say to how long they work for. A democracy gives people voice and Ehrenreich is completely correct when she says that the workers don’t live in a democracy because of their lack of voice.
ReplyDeleteNickel and Dimed, I would agree with, is something that Ehrenreich is using to try to give these low-income people a voice. Because of that, she is trying to make society a more democratic place instead of a dictatorship. She represents so many people who want to have a say but are so low on the todem pole that they know their opinion doesn’t matter. Ehrenreich changes all of that through her research in her book.
Barbara is right in many ways. If someone in America has a low-wage job it is almost impossible for them to get out of the low-wage jobs without any help. In this country you have to get a an education and sometimes a high school degree is not enough. College isn't an option for everyone and because of this you get people who have to work the low-wage jobs and they struggle. The reason it is a dictatorship is because the low-wage workers have no way out of their low-wage jobs. They can barely make enough money to keep a roof over their heads and they certainly don't have enough money to try and go to school or something like that.
ReplyDeleteHer book shows the country what is really going on in the low-wage world. I don't know if it will help the country become more democratic because if I didn't take this class I would have probably never read this book and would not have known what this book was all about. Hopefully the book will bring change but I don't see that happening just from a book.
For many of Ehrenreich's coworkers, her observations about them not being in a democracy and instead in a dictatorship, are true. Ehrenreich did not meet one person that acted as a "free agent," which a member of a democracy should be able to do. Ehrenreich states that one of the main reasons she perceives them as living under a dictatorship, is that low-wage workers seem to have no civil liberties in the workplace. The exclusion of low wage workers from democracy runs deeper than this. It seems that votes are made with dollars and not ballots. For example, supporting a company that has significant influence in the U.S., or being able to fund your chosen party/campaign. Low-wage workers, strapped for cash, are not represented in democracy as more wealthy people buy out their voices. Perhaps this is the situation that Ehrenreich is referencing when she speaks of many medium-wage workers also being excluded from democracy. Ehrenreich;s book makes our country more democratic by providing a voice for low-wage workers and helping to insure their representation.
ReplyDeleteBarbara Ehrenreich makes a good point that the lower class do not live in a democratic society. The lower class is unable to strive in the democratic society as they should. Living within a democratic society should allow people to live evenly without to much class division. Well as Barbara has shown it is extremely hard for people to make that gap smaller between live styles because our society does not allow for that to happen. if you are in the lower class than you are there. Because so few people are able to move between classes when in the lower class this shows that the democracy that our country was built on is not working properly.
ReplyDeleteBarbara's book probably opens peoples eyes to the unfairness of our society but i don't know if anything will change. if our society becomes more democratic than wouldn't that just hurt the lower class even more? She is only one person that has written this book and maybe if there were more or uprising from the lower class than wages might change but until then nothing is going to change. Barbara touches on a point in conclusion that says that minimum wage is rising but not at a fastest enough rate to be beneficial to the lower class. as the rates increase so does rent and food etc.
my computer just disconnected me! I had it all finished, if I get to it in break, I will. but know that it was at some point finished
ReplyDeleteI think this passage is very true, I agree with Ehrenreich. Not many people know or talk about low-wage workers. People tend to leave these people out in this country. People only talk about things that might affect them in their life, not people who work as low-wage workers. Democracy is all about people in the nation, not only certain part of nation. The role of “Nickel and Dimed” is to play a “notice” among everybody. The book let everyone knows the situations of these low-wage workers. After the book was published, everyone started to be more interested in these people.
ReplyDeleteI would say that I do agree - capitalism is a luxury of the wealthy, and democracy is meaningless to those whose voice has no power (and in this country, money is power). A democracy implies individuals have a say in the status of their environment: in the case of a workplace, that is known as a union. But many employers reject the unionization of their employee base, and manage to convince their workforce to agree with that sentiment (or perhaps the workers are too afraid of speaking out and losing their jobs as a result). When your voice is squelched by fear, you have to look around and wonder if you indeed live in the Land of the Free.
ReplyDeleteEhrenreich's book is a wonderful vehicle to let people in on the real reason the working class can't just move up: hard work and dedication only go so far in a world below $10 an hour. Most people just don't understand that skipping one day of work means no food the next day, and this book should definitely open some eyes.
I totally agree with Ehrenreich’s opinion of democracy in America. This passage very well reveals the truth that although the United States is generally considered the world’s preeminent democracy, a lot of its citizens don’t get any benefit from it. Democracy is more a privilege to the upper class than something shared by the whole population. Especially for low-wage workers, they have given up so many of their civil rights for the “democracy” of the rich. They have to work overtime, put up with discrimination and diseases, and go through other kind of hardship for survival. Her book raises awareness of this problem and asks for a democracy that helps everyone.
ReplyDeleteThis is very critical, and it's get to the point directly. I do not agree with Barbara, no matter in what kind of system, communism or capitalism, democracy or dictatorship, the low wage workers are still exist. Everything has to have an order, and the order is to follow the order, if one does not, then the one is out of the game. United States is the most well developed country on the world, everyone agrees to say U.S. has the best system on the world, even the best country has to deal with the unfair low wage workers, then I ask you what about the rest of the world? The problems that Barbara mentioned are existing everywhere on the world. It's the rule that people have to follow, people's loyalty to their nation is the foundation of their nation stability. So same for the jobs, one has to response for one's job, if one take it then one must do it good.
ReplyDeleteEhrenreich definitely has a point in her statements when it comes to the low-wage workforce. While of course her statement towards dictatorship is pertaining only directly to the lack of opportunity to succeed, as they obviously still have their rights, it's a good relationship she draws on. Ehrenreich's study showed how difficult and almost impossible it can be to succeed or progress in America from a low-wage environment. It's so difficult that it's almost as if the individual's rights have been taken away. That person is stuck in a situation he cannot make better due to the constant cycle he is stuck in. In this sense, Ehrenreich definitely has a point, but pertaining to the individual's whole rights, of course it's not true.
ReplyDelete