Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My results were "first generation middle-class, but raised working class." So, although there are exceptions, it seems that there really are differences in attitudes and experiences among classes.
I just find these differences fascinating, but I'm not trying to encourage "class warfare" or defensiveness. (Thanks to KathrynAragon for clarifying that! )
Have you ever lived for at least a year in an American neighborhood in which the majority of your fifty nearest neighbors did not have college degrees? Life on the farm... where the nearest neighbor is over 20 miles away. And they want 50 of them?
The question applies to any part of the body that hurts because of physical labor using the large muscles. Headaches don't count, and neither does carpal tunnel syndrome. Sore feet from having to stand up for long periods of time does count. Well this is a biased question, they value feet over hands? sore hands count as body parts as much as feet
This is true. But I am always surprised and disappointed at how many people from poor backgrounds don't do this. They watch movies, TV, or play video games instead. I see it at the library where I work.
Perhaps its what you are shown only. The hardest part of switching classes is the part where you've gotten excited about topics your peer group is not interested in, but you're not yet good enough to be taken seriously by the class you seek out on a given topic.
........ I do however, think of class as a reflection of how we have erroneously determined a persons value, and unfortunately we persist in that notion.
Your over the top disdain for the less fortunate makes me wonder about your ability to have compassion, a quality that certainly equates to a certain level of understanding beyond that of your own circumstance...
Where does this "we" come from? If You think you are not evaluating others correctly, maybe you should stop making evaluations.
I do not have disdain for those less fortunate. I really want to see that everyone has an opportunity to improve their lot in life. For some that can be difficult and I find that incredibly sad. It often reflects poorly on our society. What I have disdain for is unfortunately a very common condition: Fat, Dumb, and Lazy. The Fat is often physical but can be just a mental condition. Dumb is ignorance due to a lack of interest and motivation. With some interest and effort, one can learn a get deal about our world without advanced formal education. Lazy requires no additional explanation and seems to be the root cause that limits a great many people.
FDL is way more common in the lower classes, but I don't see it as the main criterion. The lower class individuals are those who have decided to place themselves there. Instead of taking responsibility for their own situation, they blame others; i.e., those in the upper classes. Someone else is always responsible for their failures and limits their successes. Because of that it seems easy not to try and to become FDL.
Where does this "we" come from? If You think you are not evaluating others correctly, maybe you should stop making evaluations.
I do not have disdain for those less fortunate. I really want to see that everyone has an opportunity to improve their lot in life. For some that can be difficult and I find that incredibly sad. It often reflects poorly on our society. What I have disdain for is unfortunately a very common condition: Fat, Dumb, and Lazy. The Fat is often physical but can be just a mental condition. Dumb is ignorance due to a lack of interest and motivation. With some interest and effort, one can learn a get deal about our world without advanced formal education. Lazy requires no additional explanation and seems to be the root cause that limits a great many people.
FDL is way more common in the lower classes, but I don't see it as the main criterion. The lower class individuals are those who have decided to place themselves there. Instead of taking responsibility for their own situation, they blame others; i.e., those in the upper classes. Someone else is always responsible for their failures and limits their successes. Because of that it seems easy not to try and to become FDL.
Opportunity, in my view is not something that avails itself across the social classes. Your view assumes the opposite, that everyone has an equal shot at all opportunities. I won't get into the FDL stuff as it has little bearing on any discussion of class. The "we"in my statement refers to the common view of class indicators and the judgement of one's character that goes along with it.
The OP was an inquiry relating to how we would know if someone was working class. The responses were often little more than class conscious tirades, but some were spot on, seeing class as a real divide between individuals. Most of this country probably fits into the working class if we allow some elasticity in our class determination criteria. Your assertion about the lower classes seem to include a view of class itself as a "natural" social construct, one that just abruptly arises out of a mix of individual attributes, where winners and losers are a random result. That view totally ignores the societal realities of economic consequences of class.
The lower classes are usually responding to their lack of a collective voice when they acknowledge the lopsided construct of American political/economic power, it is the upper classes who are usually found assigning blame, blaming the individual poor for their perceived shortcomings, and then assign blame for their collective plight based upon upper class notions of self responsibility as the sole determiner of one's economic well being.
The reasons for a persistent poverty found in the lower classes has more to do with power than class, it isn't hard to understand the fact of political/economic power as an upper class norm, and it follows that power is diminished in the lower rungs of our class structure. So, power and money are most often found together in the upper class, while lack of power, and, lack of money is common in the lower classes.
Not hard to understand, and yes, there are all kinds of personal attributes which can help, or hurt, but the real barriers to class mobility are institutional biases for the most part. I'm not looking for agreement, I'm merely stating what I think. While we both enjoy the fruits of our labor in retirement, i'm willing to admit the fact of having many advantages over others who failed to achieve much in economic terms. I get what you are saying, and I would agree with much of what you say with regard to how a person can better themselves, but, I can't agree with the idea that the plight of the low classes are simply a result of "natural" social formations.
What makes this difficult is that American classism is very localized. There are regions where it makes sense for someone in the working class to aim to be from a higher working class. In other regions, the opposite can happen. The tilt involved usually involves what is locally seen as positive qualities. One class component that cannot be overlooked is geography. The effect of being an area native is almost always substantial in a given location.
In the initial question, "You know you're from a working class background if", the answer is less helpful when the scope is refined. You know you're from a working class background if you see a livelihood as made from a job. Go get a good job. Work hard at a good company to get a better job. Get an education to get the better job. The emphasis is to learn a skill or trade and then to sell that skill or trade to one company that is expected to buy 100% of your output. There is no need assume none have education, but they tend to be in roles where they cannot expect much differential in their success/failure. The greatest cashier in the world can talk of worldly things, but their wage is essentially set for them. Fair dealing vs scamming can separate the group. With little control over their own outlooks, they can care a great deal about how the surroundings are governed.
Rising into the middle class are those that want to supervise the working class to get greater productivity and work on attaining the necessary supplies and labor to provide for success. Another facet are essentially the in-demand working class members who have worked their way to a role where they have excellent options in people bidding for their labor and want to take them. The differential is flexibility. They are shaping their roles. They are evolving themselves and finding opportunities that will pay them for this evolution. Ambition is key in this group.
The economic elites are those that own businesses and land. They may take a job for fulfillment reasons or training reasons, but they view help as another component to a company they have. Making deals can require a myriad of things beyond money. Cleverness is demanded. Competition is key. Self-Assurance is necessary as well as exclusivity. The worldview is entirely different in seeking organizations to shape and control.
The other group I'd put in are the social clingers. Those whose family or they themselves were once of a higher group, but they have lost their relevance. They actively trade what social status they have remaining for a boost to their survival prospects. They know how to speak and were brought up to be in a better class, but no longer have the means or merits to stay there on their own. They become puppets to the relationships they form, making them useful to the economic elites looking to show greater consensus or control in an organization.
I learned about this in college. I come from a blue-collar background (first person in my family to go to college), and the college I went to was the "flagship" state university so was exposed to a lot of middle class people in college (whos parents were professionals, managers, teachers, etc...in other words the 2nd or 3rd generation or more of college educated people, not necessarily wealthier people), it became pretty obvious they were different than me in their POV, how they spoke and dressed.
This was obvious even in a place like Kentucky, the class distinction...and not even one of wealth, more breeding and education and what your parents did for a living and their (and your) social mileau.
My experience exactly, except I grew up outside Detroit and MSU was an eye-opener.
I never knew what I didn't have.
I moved from a upper-middle class neighborhood to a poorer rural community for my job and noticed that many problems are someone else's fault. Growing up in my nicer neighborhood, when a kid failed a class, was overweight, did poorly at sports, etc, the parents taught him how to improve for next time. Down here in the same situation the blame is on the teacher, the doctor, the other team, etc. This isn't something a few people have shown me - it's a nearly universal aspect of this town.
I don't have quantifiable data, but in my experience, upper-middle class people tend to have a more positive attitude about life in general.
For the record my dad never had a college degree but managed a division in a medium-sized company, my mom was a part-time nurse, and education and lifelong learning was pressed hard upon my sister and I.
fleecing the peons improves one's attitude no matter how tiny your fleecing station in life is. Hierarchy 101. Life satisfaction and attitude is derived from comparing yourself to others down the food chain. For as long as there are folks under you - you'll get an attitude etc. boost. Many working class people self -destruct and/or get obsessed with this or that inferior group precisely because they are at the bottom, thus for mental health sake they must have (an imaginary) pecking order where they are not at the bottom. And vice versa an idea of bootstrapping and "improving" yourself to jump to an upper fleecing perch is the best, cheapest ever social control tool. It is so entrenched, powerful and irrational, it dooms Americans to very nasty future and present.
Irrational pride in ability to "work one's arse off" in the lines of work a sane person should avoid, and if it is impossible do bare minimum required to save one's health. It pays about the same. I was trying to explain my friend that churning 3000 parts per shift when her shift mates barely manage 1500 parts is stupid and it makes no friends (pay is the same!). But for her it is a part of her identity claim, a boost for her self worth and significance. In her mind management appreciate her more (while paying the same hourly rate), hard work defines her and it provides a sense of meaning, purpose and identity. In the loveless cruel world that girl seeks some sort of acknowledgement and appreciation from management that just doesnt give a dime one way or another. Pathetic. But in social segregated American society way too many people down the food chain do just that. That woman is a total health wreck in her 40th, broke and basically friendless. She is an extreme case of worker class mentality - a quest for significance by means of working hard in the wrong lines of work. Working class types do arrange themselves in a pecking order according to "working their arses off", but it is a a stupid and transient pecking order, nobody gives a dime about "working my arse off" credentials of a broke 40 y.o. health wreck.
If your value in the workplace is determined by the number of parts per day, you should clearly recognize you are in the working class. You are just another piece of the production machinery. If working faster and harder gets you nowhere, you can just drift on through doing the minimum. Or you could decide you are worth more than being a cog in the machine. You could decide you should get paid more and advance based on your efforts. Maybe the way up and out is not clear or easy, but with enough motivation and effort there will be a better way.
If your value in the workplace is determined by the number of parts per day, you should clearly recognize you are in the working class. You are just another piece of the production machinery. If working faster and harder gets you nowhere, you can just drift on through doing the minimum. Or you could decide you are worth more than being a cog in the machine. You could decide you should get paid more and advance based on your efforts. Maybe the way up and out is not clear or easy, but with enough motivation and effort there will be a better way.
Everybody is a cog arranged in a pecking order of cogs. Working class cogs are not any different than the rest of the cogs except their rock bottom place in the pecking order clashing with hierarchical nature of the hairless apes. Bootstrapping is just another coping strategy. As I pointed above - the key to feeling better about yourself is to have a cog under you in the pecking order of things. It is just that working class types tend to imagine those inferior cogs who, for example, cannot churn 3,000 pieces per shift and in the process working class types trade good deal of their health and longevity for imaginary psychological beans while the rest of the cogs have a much better chance to trade their efforts for something more tangible. But there are no guarantees, there are no pyramids without bottom, way too many cd posters are on the mission of finding inferior cogs to feel better about more deserving selves.
Last edited by RememberMee; 04-25-2017 at 10:04 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)
