The Self-Made Millionaire and the Lazy Immigrant: The Stories We Tell Ourselves

Read the text HERE

If you have been reading the news, seen videos on social media, or have that one rich uncle that gives you advice once a year on Christmas, you have come across quotes like these:

“The big secret in life is that there is no secret. Whatever your goal, you can get there if you’re willing to work.” - Oprah Winfrey

“If you’re walking down the right path and you’re willing to keep walking, eventually you’ll make progress.” - Barack Obama

“Money was never a big motivation for me, except as a way to keep score. The real excitement is playing the game.” - Donald Trump

Pierre Bourdieu

The question I am going to try to answer in this blog post is: Is being rich a sign of working hard and being poor a sign of being lazy? Although it might seem too banal to write a blog post about I argue that most right-wing policies stand on this principle.

A simple example would be: No to progressive taxation - the rich earned their wealth through hard work. We don’t need extra income from taxpayers to help the poor because if they want to have a better standard of living, they should work harder and earn it. Of course, many right-wing policies are more nuanced than that, but "rich work hard, poor are lazy" is the general principle on which many capitalists and their policies operate. 

Could it be that the socioeconomic differences between people in a state are not only a result of their effort but also something more? Let’s see what the French sociologist in his ‘The Forms of Capital’ from 1983 had to say. Bourdieu's concepts of capital have revolutionized the understanding of how power and resources function within society. He identifies three distinct forms of capital: economic, cultural, and social. Each of these forms of capital impacts individuals' behaviors that determine where in social hierarchies they end up.

Economic Capital 

Economic capital is the type of capital that most people think of when they hear the term "capital." Bourdieu defines economic capital as the material wealth that is directly convertible into money. Importantly, this form of capital allows not only direct financial benefits but also serves as a gateway to other forms of capital — these are, for example, education, networks, and cultural experiences, which have a direct effect on one's social standing.

Cultural Capital 

Bourdieu divides cultural capital into three distinct forms, each with its implications for social dynamics: 

Embodied Cultural Capital: This is the knowledge, skills, and habits acquired through long-term investment in activities such as education and personal development. These characteristics of embodied cultural capital are inherent to a single individual—they cannot be easily transferred or inherited, and they "die" with the individual. 

Objectified Cultural Capital: This form consists of valuable cultural products (books, artworks, instruments, etc.). While these items can be passed down or shared, one needs to have certain knowledge and skills to appreciate and use them effectively. For example, owning works of Mozart or Dostoyevsky doesn’t count as cultural capital unless one has the ability to engage with its content meaningfully. 

Institutionalized Cultural Capital: These are formal recognitions such as degrees and certificates, which serve as proof of one’s competence. These provide legitimacy to one’s abilities in social exchanges. Taking care of your grandmother with dementia simply doesn't mean as much as going to a 6,000-euro summer school on neurodegenerative disease at a renowned British university.

In short, cultural capital is the reason why an interviewer will prefer a candidate who presents themselves in the expected manner over someone who doesn’t.

Social Capital 

Moving beyond the individual, Bourdieu introduces social capital, defined as the network of relationships and connections that individuals maintain. This form of capital consists of social obligations and the potential for networking, which can be converted into economic capital given the appropriate circumstances—getting a job at your father’s friend’s company. Social capital is not merely about knowing people but knowing the right people and leveraging those relationships for shared benefits.

Conversions Between Capital Types 

Well, if your mother taught you etiquette but you are poor, how does it help you climb the social hierarchy? Bourdieu claims that these forms of capital interact and convert between one another. Nevertheless, these conversions are not equally accessible to all individuals and can come with associated costs. For instance, converting cultural capital into economic gain may require significant time and effort, while converting economic capital into social capital can happen relatively quickly.

Conclusion

Bourdieu's work nicely explains the dynamics of social mobility. By recognizing how economic, cultural, and social capital can be converted into one another, it shows the complicated ways people navigate societal structures. One's place in the social hierarchy is not simply a function of work and money. Instead, it is a sophisticated mosaic of whether your grandfather gave you an interesting book when you were 15 and whether you had the time to read it during the summer or if you had to spend your summers frying burgers in a fast-food restaurant to get some extra cash for another school year ahead.