Some tendencies toward a closed class system in the united states

Abstract

WE AMERICANS have long maintained that ours was an “open” class system rather than a “closed” one-perhaps more open than that of any other people. By this we have meant that our class system was plastic or flexible; that all strata of the pyramid of classes were accessible and penetrable; that there were few categorical limitations on the person with respect to his class position; that the position of individuals and families in a given stratum, during their own life times, might be altered up or down by their achievement of essential class role performance or lack of it. We have maintained the thesis of equality of opportunity and freedom of achievement. In fact, we have had a “mobility orientation” operating as a persevering, motivating, guiding aspect of individual personality.' One of the fundamental features of our “American Dream” has been the block of ideas-values-beliefs-attitudes that said that everyone has “the right to succeed,” that we should enlarge the area of our life chances and “better ourselves,” that each should strive to “reach the top,” and that there is always “room at the top.” Downward mobility or even refraining from straining upward and willingness to remain in a given class has been looked upon as a sign of weakness and has visited 'Social disapproval or pity upon the person or family. © 1952, Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.