No, Gregory Mantsois’s essay does not make a case that the wealthy are exploiting the poor. What would have made a better case would be the differences between the middle and lower classes; the economic distinction between classes. He does have any support in his argument of the poor are being exploited. And although there isn’t much being done about money issues and the wealthy aren’t doing much too help, the wealthy aren’t taking advantage of the poor. What he does do is show how the wealthy have more advantages. But I do not this qualifies as an argument.
I do think it’s interesting that he is making this case about the wealthy, which are the majority of his audience, and he makes several attacks to try and get us on his side. By having the data that Mantsois provides just makes the reading seem very heavy and dry. It doesn’t add to his credentials or any logical appeal.
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Engaging the Text
Posted by Lauren at 6:15 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Lauren-
Our blog responses to the essay, Class in America-2003, were nearly identical, which is wonderful. You and I are one of only a handful of students who came to the conclusion that Mantsios making disillusioned attacks on the wealthy. He is blaming the upper class for the woes of the poverty stricken people in country and without reason either.
I also agree with you that the answer to the question posed in the book is “no”. He never explicitly or implicitly talks about the wealthy exploiting the poor. I really have no idea where the book is coming from when they asked that question. All I saw in the article was slanted viewpoint that wanted to show how innocent the lower class population is and how mean and evil the upper class is for depriving the lower class of money. That argument disgusts me. I could go on forever about this topic, as you could tell from our discussion today in class, but I’ll stop here.
In your blog you bring up very interesting points. The point about how he is not showing how the rich are exploiting the poor, and that he didn't back up his argument with anything. You make an interesting point when you say that just listing advantages that wealthy people have, isn't an argument. Even though I find it intersting, but I have to disagree. I believe that by showing the advantages of wealthy people is an argument, but I agree with you that it is not the right argument to make. Listing advantages for the wealthy isn't show exploitation of the poor, just what wealthy people can do. So I agree with you that he never talks about the wealthy exploiting the poor.
Post a Comment