Sumner's Theory Of Social Inequality

William Graham Sumner’s beliefs, on the other hand, proved to be more callous than those of Andrew Carnegie. While Sumner agrees about the inevitability of poverty, he refutes Carnegie’s assertion that a rich man dies dishonored if he neglects to donate his wealth to charity. A proponent of Social Darwinism, Sumner believes that social inequality is the right and natural outcome of the struggles of men trying to succeed in the world, otherwise known as “survival of the fittest.” Consequently, the rich possess no obligation to aid the poor because the blame for inequality does not fall on fellow men, but the harsh reality of nature, which ordains the “chances and conditions of life on earth” (99). Sumner also criticizes men like Carnegie who take pity on the poor and weak which causes them to “devise schemes for remedying what they
If a man makes no effort to raise himself above poverty, “social doctors” rush to his side to help, granting him the capital and aid that the “others” had to work for (101). Sumner thus asserts that “poverty is the best policy,” for the impoverished will always receive support, whereas the wealthy will be obligated to give said support (102). This dependency is rooted in the social structure present in the Middle Ages when men “were united by custom and prescription” into ranks and guilds (102). Sumner suggests society does away with this medieval system and instead pursue liberty of contract, which cultivates liberty, individualism, and independence (102). However, many citizens viewed this system as a violation to their rights since “neither government nor unions” could interfere with working conditions, regardless of how deplorable they were (625). As a result, the Knights of Labor initiated an assault on the understanding of freedom “grounded in Social Darwinism and liberty of contract”