Schwalbe gave a distinction between a fair game and a rigged game in his manuscript
SOCL 413W
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course Tittle
Professor’s Name
Date
Question a
Schwalbe gave a distinction between a fair game and a rigged game in his manuscript. According to him, a fair game signifies a game in which every person plays by the same rules and is in the same way well equipped to finish. A fair game is when individuals share ideas about what can be done and those they can’t do without creating trouble for themselves or other people. On the other hand, a rigged game is one that makes and propagates inequality and diminishes our humanity. The rigged game is where unfairness is created into “rules of the game,” institutional inequality, and redlining. Schwalbe asserts that the focus of rigging the game is to scrutinize the processes that perpetuate inequality. Inequality is systemic since individuals make rules to rig the game in their favor, and those rules are established to promote inequality (Schwalbe, 2020). He focuses on access to resources, including knowledge, skin color, money, and skill in discussing unfairness. In Rigging the Game, Schwalbe provides a compelling and clear outline of how the rules that shape everyday interaction and economic life generate and perpetuate unfairness in American society. He follows inequality from its origins to its regulation. The rigged game entails the existence of inequality of class, race, and gender. Schwalbe attempts to show how this rigged game can be challenged and overcome.
Question b
Redlining signifies a systematic denial of several goods or services by local governments, federal government agencies, or the private sector either openly or by the discriminatory increase of prices. It’s also whereby a mortgage moneylender repudiates advances or an insurance provider confines services to a community’s particular area. It was the activity of delineating areas with Black Americans in red ink on maps as a warning to loan givers. Schwalbe shows how redlining works to portray inequality in his writing. On page 75 of his writing, he mentions that the practice of redlining is a better example of how rules function to generate inequality that favors individuals who were not in the beginning in a place to rig the game in their favor. Among the implements that create and perpetuate inequality, he recognizes neighborhood redlining (Schwalbe, 2020). It entails racial inequality made by the informal rules. Abundantly, white vicinities attempted their best, with the FHA’s assistance, to keep African Americans out. Chapter two of his writing elucidates how what he refers to as the “rules of the game” generate an unfair system. He continues by stating that children who got an advantage from redlining, who are currently grown, do not rig the game in their favor. According to him, they just got a benefit from it later, most possibly without knowing how those welfares came from in unfair rules of the game.
Question c
According to Schwalbe, higher education is a rigged game because attaining it depends on performance highly influenced by unequal dissemination of resources. The example that he gives is when dealing with rules in the institution. Higher education has actually rigged the system against individuals who attend them (Schwalbe, 2020). Schools use specific rules to pit learners against each other. By using these rules, the higher education systems keep learners from asking each other for help and working together to find solutions. The learning institutes encourage learners to view one another as enemies and hide their work from each other. According to Schwalbe, the higher education monoculture has resulted directly in a sense that the system is rigged. With the increase in tuition fees and learners’ debt indicating no sign of reduction, it can appear as if the state’s higher education system is rigged.
Question d
There are some ways that the citizens may feel that the system is rigged against them. When some individuals have an advantage that others do not have, and people who rig a game do it in their favor, then other citizens will feel that the system is rigged against them. When practices are institutionalized upon being established as the routine way individuals do things together, this kind of unfairness gives some individuals advantages that others do not have. According to Schwalbe, people will feel the system is rigged due to individuals behaving themselves and following rules instead of breaking them. They can also consider a system being rigged when tax breaks and loopholes set in place only give advantage to the rich and usually are not accessible to the deprived. Tax breaks commonly benefit wealthy individuals and keep them at the top. Citizens feel that the system I rigged when wealthy persons are permitted to pay taxes at a lower rate based on their income. Rules can be similar for each person, but others have different means and resources to get ahead. Equality is not determined by the rules being the same, but both teams are equally equipped to deal with the challenge. Citizens feel that the system is rigged when even though everyone has the right to speak out, some people can speak much louder than others. Schwalbe asserts that the inequality of a rigged system results when resources are imbalanced. Inequality is occasionally due to actions intentionally done by individuals who are selfish and mean. Capitalism makes sure inequality since the rules govern productive assets and workforces and their toil. The citizens feel that the system is rigged against them when rather than being devalued and controlled from the outside, they are devalued and controlled from the inside (their minds, individuals oppress themselves)
Reference
Schwalbe, M. (2020). The Spirit of Blumer’s Method as a Guide to Sociological Discovery. Symbolic Interaction, 43(4), 597-614.
https://doi.org/10.1002/symb.469
–
