Are we living in a classless society? Does class still matter?

[foo_fighter]

Maybe I've got the wrong end of the stick here, but this "appears" to be more about snobbery than anything else.

 

What really amazes me is that it matters so much to some people that they are seen to be middle class.

 

They obviously aren't very happy in themselves to need so much external validation.

 

 

 

 

PS. Why would it matter anyway if every single person in Britain were considered "working" class (if they all worked), we don't need to define this as a proportion of population surely.

 

PPS. I never did get an answer to "what has "Oxford educated" or "from Windsor" got to do with class anyway?"

[Titian]

Originally posted by foo_fighter

Maybe I've got the wrong end of the stick here, but this "appears" to be more about snobbery than anything else.

 

What really amazes me is that it matters so much to some people that they are seen to be middle class.

 

They obviously aren't very happy in themselves to need so much external validation.

 

 

 

 

PS. Why would it matter anyway if every single person in Britain were considered "working" class (if they all worked), we don't need to define this as a proportion of population surely.

 

PPS. I never did get an answer to "what has "Oxford educated" or "from Windsor" got to do with class anyway?"

 

That is exactly what it appears to be!

People who feel the need to tell everyone all about what fantastic big house they have etc.etc., do not have any form of class in my opinion.

There are plenty of people who are from aristocracy on the other hand who will "get down and dirty" with the likes of us "lefties" (being as my idealism is being classed as that)

 

As far as ideaology goes, if it was only ideaology then where would the good be in our lives. Why not thank these types rather than criticise as without people like them where the hell would we be in such an materialistic society?

 

Being materialistic isn't, quite frankly, sustainable is it?

 

If we all thought "whats the use" as T020 seems to then there wouldn't be much point to anything and a lot more misery in the world.

 

Now THAT is reality!

[Phanerothyme]

Class is a loaded term when applied as a collective noun for a group of people.

 

Society is much less stratified than it was, and definitions of class made more 'sense' - although like race, class is often a matter of self identification .

 

Stratification of 'social order' is still apparent, but class mobility is much more fluid, and so groupings now tend to be of socio economic types (see lists in this thread), and the simplified 'upper middle or working class' is a total anachronism.

[t020]

Snobbery has nothing to do with it. It just simply doesn't make sense to lump in 99% of the population as being working class purely because they work. There's usually a vast difference, as I've stated, between the lifestyles, income, wealth, education, etc etc, between what most people would define the working class (loosely manual blue collar workers) and middle class (loosely white collar, qualified professional/ managerial). That's not to say one group is better than the other but to lump them into the same group doesn't make sense and is pretty meaningless. In areas where the definition of class still has relevance, e.g. marketing, it's often important to be able to differentiate between them. As Phanerothyme points out, class mobility is also much more fluid now and these groupings are often "socio economic".

[Cyclone]

if we lump 99% of the population into 'working class' the distinction will be completely dropped as it's meaningless (applies to nearly everyone) and a new one will have to be invented to break the 99% down into sensible groups, along the lines that t020 is saying, income, education, behaviour, etc...

The assertion that anyone who works is working class never has been and is not correct, by any definition except yours. So unless you use the generally accepted definition we are likely to misunderstand you.

 

nick - i don't like you putting 'vote conservative' in that list, and number of children in a family have nothing to do with class. Although an unusually large brood might be an indication.

 

Originally posted by foo_fighter

Maybe I've got the wrong end of the stick here, but this "appears" to be more about snobbery than anything else.

 

What really amazes me is that it matters so much to some people that they are seen to be middle class.

 

They obviously aren't very happy in themselves to need so much external validation.

 

 

 

 

PS. Why would it matter anyway if every single person in Britain were considered "working" class (if they all worked), we don't need to define this as a proportion of population surely.

 

PPS. I never did get an answer to "what has "Oxford educated" or "from Windsor" got to do with class anyway?"

[tslogf74]

Originally posted by foo_fighter

Maybe I've got the wrong end of the stick here, but this "appears" to be more about snobbery than anything else."

 

It's absolutely about snobbery. But not just the people who are desperate to be middle class, it's also those who would not betray their working class origins.

 

The fox hunting ban is, in my opinion, a perfect example of a class war. The upper classes banned all the commoners' blood sports - **** fighting etc. - and kept their own as it was considered more noble, and I know a lot of people who supported the ban largely because it annoys the 'toffs' and have little regard for the welfare of the fox.

 

I suppose it's a bit of a silent prejudice now, like racism or sexism, which most enlightened folk find abhorent but still permeates our society at all levels (including in the subconscious minds of the aforementioned, enlightened folk).

 

IMO.

[Don_Kiddick]

and then there's the type of 'class' that no amount of money can buy.

 

Lookat the Beckhams

[foo_fighter]

Originally posted by Cyclone

if we lump 99% of the population into 'working class' the distinction will be completely dropped as it's meaningless (applies to nearly everyone)...

Good.

Originally posted by Cyclone

...and a new one will have to be invented to break the 99% down into sensible groups...

I don't know if you noticed, but that's already happened. (see the post by Timo)

[Cyclone]

Originally posted by timo

All human societies are stratified, in other words, people are pigeonholed by those in positions of power. There are various systems of stratification. The best known one is the Registrar General's system, which defines class in relation to occupation. It lists eight classes [replacing the old A, B C1 D etc system]. I believe that Professionals, such as University lecturers, higher managerial staff etc are listed as 'social class1'. Oddly, self-employed businessmen [and the example is a driving instructor] are class 6. Bottom of the pile are the 'Underclass' at number 8; the long-term sick and long-term unemployed. This latter case is a good example of a sociological term becoming institutionalised.

 

It is possible for one to be socio-economically one class, and culturally quite something else. Hence, a Bank branch manager might be defined as class 2 because of his occupation, but yet his 'cultural interests' revolve around stereotypically 'working class' pursuits such as the betting shop , and his 'cultural capital' extends only to 'low art' and popular entertainment, such as the music of the charts, and TV 's 'soap operas'.

 

how does that support your point ff? Working Class could easily be equated to one of the class numbers. Changing the label doesn't change the fact.

My opinion is that you'd like 'working class' not to exist anymore and are trying to argue that it doesn't despite pretty much most people and organisations still using the term. If people still say it, then it still exists.

[foo_fighter]

Originally posted by Cyclone

Blah, blah, waffle...

Cyclone, I think we'll invent a new class just for you.

 

Z99: Permanently argumentative in a tremendously pedantic way "class".