“Class” is a touchy subject in American political parlance. Any talk of class – apart from the purely descriptive sense of the term whose main purpose is taxonomical, to tell you where you stand along the American hierarchy of values and our peculiar measure of success – is bound to be disturbing because it runs counter to the American Spirit, the idea that we can become whomever we want to become, that there’s no stopping us if we’re ambitious and enterprising enough, that the sky is the limit. But you know the rest. The American Dream writ large is the incarnation.
So no, I’m not speaking here of our middle class or of our lower middle-class, not even of our upper class and beyond. These are taxonomical categories; and when so used, they’re denotative of our standing in society. And given upward mobility, another indispensable element of the American Dream, it’s no wonder these terms are uncontroversial. In fact, they perpetuate the myth of “belonging,” the myth that we’re all in the same boat, that only our abilities, determination and hard work separate one from the other. And given equality under the law, we surely must live, or so the story goes, in the best of all possible worlds. Legal protection, coupled with unlimited potential for individual success, surely must sound like a dream come true. Indeed, it’s the unique accomplishment of liberalism, classical or modern, that it perpetuates this dream.
Which is why whenever “class” is used in any way other than as a taxonomical term, denoting our present status in society, with a mind, of course, to our unquestioned assumptions as to social fluidity, it is bound to evoke a negative response for it strikes at the very core of our beliefs. “Class warfare” is the extreme form of the adverse reaction, and we’re surely familiar with the accusation: it’s un-American, we’re told, undermining the very spirit and principles upon which this nation was founded, inciting violence at worst, social unrest at best. And given that we’ve shed all pretense at class by virtue of either birth or privilege, unlike some of our Continental brethren for whom the vestiges of the Old World, it’s arguable, still remain, no wonder we’re getting incensed. For it’s our creed, our article of faith, that not class but meritocracy rules, no ifs, ands or buts. And that if anyone doesn’t make it “the American way,” it’s their own damn fault. Thus the myth is kept alive.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Anarcissie
Like many others, I find bell hooks's recommendation that we love one another rather steep. At least with Jesus we get the assurance that our Father In Heaven is backing us up (and will do us serious harm if we don't make the effort).
I thought the Ehrenreich article was surprisingly impervious to radical analyses of class, but maybe I missed something. Class doesn't 'happen'; it's carefully constructed by many and imposed on all, by force if necessary.
My own take on the OWS phenomenon so far is very different. I think Americans have acknowledged and lived with class for a long time, although in different and shifting ways. After all, our educational system, which was formed in the middle and late 19th century, is primarily a class filter and processor, and an overt one at that -- people go to college and temporarily acquire useless information so that they can get into the middle class. What went wrong in 2006-2008 (and in 1929) was not that class became visible but that the ruling class had failed to govern the community correctly, partly because it had failed to govern itself. The breaking point was different for different people. For many it must have been the moment when Mr. O put Social Security and Medicare, the Ark of the Covenent of social welfare, on the block. However, although current events have inspired actions such as OWS, there is as yet no sign of a serious challenge to the present order of things within the party-politics system. The proggies want better Welfare, not revolution.
History tells us that there is a lot of ruin in a country, so our present ruling class may have some way to go before they shape up or are replaced. Meanwhile, people like me have an expanded opportunity to spread subversive ideas among the folk.
2 - roger nowosielski
"However, although current events have inspired actions such as OWS, there is as yet no sign of a serious challenge to the present order of things within the party-politics system. The proggies want better Welfare, not revolution."
I don't believe I said anything different; in fact, I'm just as skeptical as you in that no serious challenge has been made.
I read Thompson in a more restricted context. When he says "class happens," I take him to mean that it's a coalescing of a bunch of prior events (just like Eco's insight that the storming of the Bastille was but icing on the cake). Besides, I don't think he's addressing the formation of the existing class structure but a possibility of emergence of a working class which opposes the existing social order. Not only the title of his work suggests that. Also, let's not forget that early twentieth century England was steeped in the socialist ideology, much more so than the US.
As to bell hooks, I'm not exactly certain what point you're making. Granted, the passage cited is rather open to interpretation, but her main point is that in order for a substantial coalition among those who are oppressed to form, we must look beyond our specific oppression, oppression which is particular to our own group of faction, and start identifying with all forms of oppression, even the forms which do not affect us personally. And for that, a certain level of empathy is a must. I would have thought this was rather implicit.
3 - One Americans Rant
Roger,
I think we are in exactly the same situation as were medieval serfs, with the land-owners (Corporate CEOs & Shareholders) in charge of our daily lives, their minions selling us time in our hovels (bankers and lenders), and those mid-level powers overseen by their liege (government), to which all profits of the land we work flows towards and from which rules, edicts, punishments flow from, and if we disappoint the lord enough, the men-at-arms (police) are sent to haul us to a dungeon.
Going back even further in time, our current society strongly resembles Rome during the peak of the Coliseum days, where we have our bread (fast food) and circuses (sports & Hollywood) to keep us entertained and in our place, while the Caesar (government) looks on with disdain at the antics of the crowd, eventually deigning to give a thumbs-up, or down (taxes up or down, to war or peace) to the roar of the masses, all the while sipping wine and eating candied dates in the shadow of slave-shaded sanctuary, and fawned upon by the gladiator-of-the-moment before he is sent back into the ring.
Of course there are still classes, which are just another way of separating us from them; and no matter who makes up the us, there is always a them.
4 - roger nowosielski
And that from the mouth of a conservative?
5 - Anarcissie
It's true I don't know what bell hooks means when she says 'love'. Maybe that's her fault -- she should have put in a parable or two. I don't think I love my neighbors much, regardless of their class, ethnicity, religion, politics, or national origin, but I'd probably pull any of them out of a ditch Good-Samaritan fashion if it was not a great inconvenience to myself. I've been reading David Graeber's book about debt and I've just gone through a part where he reminds us that the social substrate on which everything else is founded is communistic; for example, if your neighbors need to be pulled out of a ditch, you pull them out, without cutting a deal for ditch rescue services first. Usually. Maybe this is what hooks is really talking about; God knows.
As to Thompson, I would have said not 'class happens' but 'class consciousness happens'. The class system is already there.
6 - roger nowosielski
I took Thompson to be saying precisely that -- class consciousness.
Glad you're bringing up Graeber again. I do intend to re-read that part about debt
7 - One Americans Rant
Roger,
Was #4 aimed at me? I'm probably not as far right as most of the conservatives here, in fact I'm just right of center on most issues. There might even be a few where I'm a tiny bit left of the middle.
8 - roger nowosielski
Since I'm at it, I'm about to post a link referencing Anarcissie comment on David Graeber.
Stay tuned, you should find it most interesting.
9 - roger nowosielski
Anarcissie, OAR, Igor too.
The following is a topnotch interview with David Greaber about his recent book (see #5):
interview.
It's no substitute, of course, for the real thing, but it's as good a summary of the underlying ideas as one could hope for. Graeber does indeed come across as a seminal thinker. He manages to unravel the present financial system for a deck of cards it really is.
Interestingly, the banking term for all this credit is "float." Notice, however, than when an individual, not an institution, engages in the same practice, as when writing a check for which there isn't yet a cover, we called it "kiting" and it is, technically at least, prosecutable to the full extent of the law.
I guess different strokes for different folks.
10 - One Americans Rant
Roger,
The Graeber interview link doesn't seem to work.
11 - roger nowosielski
Sorry, try this one.
12 - roger nowosielski
More of Graber's thoughts on 5000 years history of debt, this time in video form:
part one
part two
13 - roger nowosielski
A short interview with Amy Goodman, Democracy Now!
14 - roger nowosielski
This time a podcast from the Brian Lehrer show.
Interestingly, while Graeber recommends consumer debt forgiveness as one kind of solution, the recent thrust on the part of the US government is re-institution of the debtors' prisons.
Is our government afraid of something, and who exactly is in the pockets of whom>
15 - roger nowosielski
Another interview.
16 - roger nowosielski
A succinct review by Financial Times.
One of Graeber's arguments is that indebtedness figured as a major cause of many social revolts and upheavals. It may be interesting to note, in this connection, that the most direct if not immediate cause of OWS has been precisely that: not so much a universal concern with social justice but the ever-growing burned of student debt.
17 - roger nowosielski
Another topnotch review from Social Text.
This one covers almost all the bases.
18 - roger nowosielski
@17
... burden of student debt ...
19 - Anarcissie
I liked the 'ever-growing burned of student debt'.
20 - roger nowosielski
Occasionally, mistyping does lead to interesting turns of phrase, doesn't it?
Almost like monkeys coming up with Shakespeare.
21 - roger nowosielski
Just watching Richard III, one of my old time favorites. What a treat!
Only Shakespeare and Olivier can make you sympathize with a villain.
22 - El Bicho
have you seen Ian McKellan's version? it's set in an alternate version of '30 Britain. seek it out
23 - roger nowosielski
Will do. But tell you the truth, can't be turning these articles any longer. The medium isn't powerful enough In fact, it stinks.
Time for tragedy and tragic hero. But here's the dilemma that's been facing me for years. Our times are so mundane, so bereft of drama.
Must look to Pinter for inspiration and ideas.
24 - roger nowosielski
The Proposal
25 - roger nowosielski
And yes, now is the winter of our discontent.