There are new categories that have emerged that are diluting the impact of the simple class structure. The anywhere and somewhere split. The rights obsessed and self responsible groups. These transcend the class and dominate most of our personal philosophies. They often tend to coincide loosely. But not always the way people would expect. Odd alliances exist. Upper class and lower class being linked to somewhere people. Has the breakdown in the class system boundaries (which most people think is good) caused more uncertainties more anxiety and a greater fear of failure because for all those that go up some are pushed down.
My parents were upper middle class. My great grandad was knighted, my dad was MD of a multinational, I went to university, was a civil service faststreamer and I’m now a senior manager and shareholder in a consultancy serving the construction industry. So I’m solidly upper middle class you might think. Well yes and no, I’m married to a lorry driver who left school at 16 and trained as a plumber. His family are solid Derbyshire working class “somewheres” Our son is a skilled manual worker like his dad and paternal grandfather. We live in an ex-pit village. Yes we have a better standard of living then my husbands colleagues but my allegiances are solidly working class. After decades I fit into both classes. And anyone who considers my trajectory “downward mobility” will get very short shrift. I consider myself very lucky as my husband, like most people around me, are incredibly good people and our community is extraordinary. The lanyard class has belittle us and mocked our concerns at their peril for long enough.
Interesting but since post WWII we've seen the emergence of an adaptation of the class system.
Funny thing about class is those who identify with it but tend to manipulate class stratification, an obsession, is the middle classes yet by default are notoriously the most unstable of all the classes.
From the late 1960 to mid 1970's, through the swinging 60's into the mid 70's it mostly gained momentum at uni level then hitting local authority level mid 1980's to its current status where it dominates under the veil of GPM modelling & old school class structures.
I call this process the impressionist class, giving the impression of connectivity & societal cohesion disguised as control.
The irony of it all is instead of a brush like its 1860-1880 counterpart in art, Monet etc, the gate keeper impressionist classes need only the craft of indipertism to manipulate indirect conformity, in a professional capacity, to give the impression of connectivity and at the same time keep the common man at arms length.
Giving the impression of connectivity is yet touch nothing directly as by default the non-touch branding is notoriouslt detached establishment wise.
This is why the common man has mutual distrust of institutions as we are essentially a presentational style society & where most of the money goes regardless of red or blue versions of rosette. So when eventually reaching the toe end there's only tokenistic crumbs left.
The impressionist movement is part of the non-touch branding consortiums that is controlled by higher education, not the ballot, box that provides the source of frontline agencies, man power to sustain the landlord status of governance, stage 2, not the tenancy bit, stage 1.
This mechanism, the impressionist classes, are groomed to get into character using representative style dispensaries masquerading due process as democracy.
Remember throughout history stretching back to antiquity it's the middle management overseeing mechanisms that are the most unstable of all the classes & where the toxic polarised incendiary tendencies are mostly driven by it.
The non-touch branding style of engagement is not a good model for fixing & getting hands-on but is immensely lucrative pretending we are.
As Maurice Glassman (Blue Labour) pointed out on the Camilla Tominy show, the old class system is essentially dead. the terms left (Red) and right (Blue) have little relevance except in media and X spats, the truth is that there are now Globalists and Localists.
As the name suggests Globalists are interested in supranational organisations such as the EU where the individual is claimed to be the focus but has processes which make it almost impossible for the individual to make their views known
Localists are individuals that believe in the nation state, local representation and the ability to of the individual to hold power to account
Some would argue this is a leave or remain argument, to your point, working class and "elites" but here is the thing, the recent Streeting/Burnham comments (which will derail Burnham) regarding re-joining the EU will make many avid remainers (globalist tendencies) to hold their nose and vote labour further fracturing the cosy media driven simplistic left and right
One could argue with the damascene journey the conservative have been on driven by reform that we now have the bizarre situation where labour ( working class?) are effectively the globalists and the conservatives/reform are let localists
People use the term 'class' a lot, but it's never properly defined and personally, I don't like class-stratification and would hope for an end to it altogether - we're all people and we all have to work for a living.
It is funny how politicians are often keen to stress their 'humble' beginnings though. I think particularly of Keir Starmer (although many others do this too.)
The way Starmer used to bang on about his father having been 'only a toolmaker' as if this was some kind of lowly servile job simply illustrated that Starmer knew absolutely nothing about the engineering industry at all.
In every engineering company, the toolmakers were the elite group of highly skilled (and, rightly, the highest paid) precision engineers, making machine parts, press tools, sub-assembly fixtures etc out of the hardest metals and to extremely tight tolerances. The notion that a toolmaker would ever humbly introduce himself at a social gathering with an embarrassed: 'I work in a factory' (as Starmer claimed) is as nonsensical as a surgeon introducing himself with 'I work in a hospital'.
I'd happily vote for a politician who came from any social background as long as he/she had the right policies for my family and the country.
There are new categories that have emerged that are diluting the impact of the simple class structure. The anywhere and somewhere split. The rights obsessed and self responsible groups. These transcend the class and dominate most of our personal philosophies. They often tend to coincide loosely. But not always the way people would expect. Odd alliances exist. Upper class and lower class being linked to somewhere people. Has the breakdown in the class system boundaries (which most people think is good) caused more uncertainties more anxiety and a greater fear of failure because for all those that go up some are pushed down.
My parents were upper middle class. My great grandad was knighted, my dad was MD of a multinational, I went to university, was a civil service faststreamer and I’m now a senior manager and shareholder in a consultancy serving the construction industry. So I’m solidly upper middle class you might think. Well yes and no, I’m married to a lorry driver who left school at 16 and trained as a plumber. His family are solid Derbyshire working class “somewheres” Our son is a skilled manual worker like his dad and paternal grandfather. We live in an ex-pit village. Yes we have a better standard of living then my husbands colleagues but my allegiances are solidly working class. After decades I fit into both classes. And anyone who considers my trajectory “downward mobility” will get very short shrift. I consider myself very lucky as my husband, like most people around me, are incredibly good people and our community is extraordinary. The lanyard class has belittle us and mocked our concerns at their peril for long enough.
Interesting but since post WWII we've seen the emergence of an adaptation of the class system.
Funny thing about class is those who identify with it but tend to manipulate class stratification, an obsession, is the middle classes yet by default are notoriously the most unstable of all the classes.
From the late 1960 to mid 1970's, through the swinging 60's into the mid 70's it mostly gained momentum at uni level then hitting local authority level mid 1980's to its current status where it dominates under the veil of GPM modelling & old school class structures.
I call this process the impressionist class, giving the impression of connectivity & societal cohesion disguised as control.
The irony of it all is instead of a brush like its 1860-1880 counterpart in art, Monet etc, the gate keeper impressionist classes need only the craft of indipertism to manipulate indirect conformity, in a professional capacity, to give the impression of connectivity and at the same time keep the common man at arms length.
Giving the impression of connectivity is yet touch nothing directly as by default the non-touch branding is notoriouslt detached establishment wise.
This is why the common man has mutual distrust of institutions as we are essentially a presentational style society & where most of the money goes regardless of red or blue versions of rosette. So when eventually reaching the toe end there's only tokenistic crumbs left.
The impressionist movement is part of the non-touch branding consortiums that is controlled by higher education, not the ballot, box that provides the source of frontline agencies, man power to sustain the landlord status of governance, stage 2, not the tenancy bit, stage 1.
This mechanism, the impressionist classes, are groomed to get into character using representative style dispensaries masquerading due process as democracy.
Remember throughout history stretching back to antiquity it's the middle management overseeing mechanisms that are the most unstable of all the classes & where the toxic polarised incendiary tendencies are mostly driven by it.
The non-touch branding style of engagement is not a good model for fixing & getting hands-on but is immensely lucrative pretending we are.
Dr Dougzy KC.
As Maurice Glassman (Blue Labour) pointed out on the Camilla Tominy show, the old class system is essentially dead. the terms left (Red) and right (Blue) have little relevance except in media and X spats, the truth is that there are now Globalists and Localists.
As the name suggests Globalists are interested in supranational organisations such as the EU where the individual is claimed to be the focus but has processes which make it almost impossible for the individual to make their views known
Localists are individuals that believe in the nation state, local representation and the ability to of the individual to hold power to account
Some would argue this is a leave or remain argument, to your point, working class and "elites" but here is the thing, the recent Streeting/Burnham comments (which will derail Burnham) regarding re-joining the EU will make many avid remainers (globalist tendencies) to hold their nose and vote labour further fracturing the cosy media driven simplistic left and right
One could argue with the damascene journey the conservative have been on driven by reform that we now have the bizarre situation where labour ( working class?) are effectively the globalists and the conservatives/reform are let localists
People use the term 'class' a lot, but it's never properly defined and personally, I don't like class-stratification and would hope for an end to it altogether - we're all people and we all have to work for a living.
It is funny how politicians are often keen to stress their 'humble' beginnings though. I think particularly of Keir Starmer (although many others do this too.)
The way Starmer used to bang on about his father having been 'only a toolmaker' as if this was some kind of lowly servile job simply illustrated that Starmer knew absolutely nothing about the engineering industry at all.
In every engineering company, the toolmakers were the elite group of highly skilled (and, rightly, the highest paid) precision engineers, making machine parts, press tools, sub-assembly fixtures etc out of the hardest metals and to extremely tight tolerances. The notion that a toolmaker would ever humbly introduce himself at a social gathering with an embarrassed: 'I work in a factory' (as Starmer claimed) is as nonsensical as a surgeon introducing himself with 'I work in a hospital'.
I'd happily vote for a politician who came from any social background as long as he/she had the right policies for my family and the country.