Marx, Weber, and Wright.

Marx, Weber, and Wright.  They all have their own ideas on what makes a social class come into being.  When looking at all three theories it is a bit difficult to pull out the nuanced differences at first but over time and through class discussion I have come to see these three theories in the following way:

Marx – This man believed that class conflict and the class structure of his time (c1848) was investable based on industrialization.  He believed that class structure was a historical development that had to happen just as socialism has to come next in our social development.

Weber – This man believed that the development of class status was not inevitable but was nuanced and ambiguous.  Furthermore, those within a class structure do not clearly see their place in the structure.  What changes the social structure for Weber is communal action (much like Marx who saw socialism as a result of unionization).  However, unlike Marx, Weber believed that individuals maintain a closer relationship with their own communities than with their class.

Wright – This man believed that while Marx may have had a point he was to limiting and that if we are going to talk about class we need to talk about a Middle Class. He also believed that historical circumstances and everyday change brings about changes to the social structure but that these changes are not inevitable.  They are based on the differentiation of skills, authority, and expertise and what is valued at that moment in society.

Although the differences are subtle they are there.  If anything I believe that as time progressed the theories became more believable.  However, I also think that it is hard to define what makes class even after the fact.  There are too many minute details that make up a person’s identity and with that a group’s identity to say this is what makes the middle class.  However difficult this task may be though I believe that the search for a standard theory is important if only to spark debate. 

Overall I have to ask though, do we really need theory to tell us how life is?  Is it so bad for someone to think that they are doing better than they are? Or does this only lead to consumerism and a debt raked society? If it is the latter that I say theorize on but if it is the former I would prefer to be kept in the dark with my warm and happy thoughts of where I could be someday. 

Class Diary #4

I am a hopeless romantic so I love movies which end with the underdog winning.  One such movie is Maid In Manhattan.  For those of you who have not seen this movie it is about a maid in a posh hotel in New York City who finds herself in a relationship with one of the guests who does not know she is the maid.  Through amusing anecdotes and laughable situations she manages to turn this possible lovely one night stand into a relationship to last a life time.  My question, however, is what happens after the movie is over?

We recently read about how people who are attempting to switch from one social class to another can experience survivor’s guilt (a label that I dislike greatly).  This makes me wonder how a single mother from the projects is going to psychologically fit into the world of a white upper class elected representative.  Of course the movie does not look into life after the happily ever after but if it did I believe it would see many things not so romantic.  For instance, can a working girl give up her job to live a life of banquets and caterers? Sure the thought sounds nice but I would go crazy! Also, can she change the way that she speaks and acts to permanently fit in with the crowd of people this man will be introducing her to?

To be honest the whole idea of the movie is absurd.  The premise is one that every little girl dreams of but one that rarely happens.  There are famous examples of women who were taken from working class backgrounds put into posh settings and eventually had to leave.  Now, these experiences changed the women forever but something ingrained in them could not be taken out, something stopped them from being fully able to assimilate into their new social class.

The struggles that the Maid must overcome to have a relationship with the man in this movie cause her to “borrow” clothing, lie, and eventually lose her job.  Is all that worth giving up who you are? Would you want to be someone different just to have someone notice you?

The most striking line in this movie is when the Maid confronts the man about the fact that she was invisible to him when she was cleaning his floors.  It was only after she “borrowed” clothes and pretended to be someone she was not that he even saw her.  This scene makes me think of how many times the people around us are invisible to us.  Chris mentioned in class last week that he thanks the cleaning crew at South Station.  This is an act that does not happen enough. 

If you ever watch this movie you will realize that the whole thing is about class differences.  And, even though it makes for a great movie, it makes for a horrible representation of the working class while glorifying elitist society.

PS: The term survivors guilt is not high on my list of liked phrases because it implies that lower social classes are something to crawl away from.  It says that they are bad and that one must survive to live better.  It also implies that those who do not rise above their social class are failures.  While the idea behind the term is something that I can get behind (feelings resulting from a change in one’s social standing) the term itself should be replaced with something more fitting or just done away with all together.

Class Diary #3

The other day my husband and his friend were doing something in the kitchen and they began to talk about their childhood experiences.  As the conversation progressed they began to compare notes on how poor their families were.  Ken, my husband’s friend, said that his family used to have farmers stew which was French fries, meat, and macaroni and cheese all mixed together and that would be dinner.  Toward the end of the conversation my husband stated, “When I was growing up we could not afford Ziplock.”

The theme of this conversation was one I could have chimed in on but instead I sat back and thought about what their conversation represented.  Through their words Ken and Justin were recreating class in an atmosphere that was surrounded by food and material goods.  Neither of them lacked family love or support and neither seemed worse for the wear but each recognized that they had made something of themselves since their no Ziplock days.

Each week we talk a lot about what makes class.  Is it where we come from? Is it what we do? Is it how we eat? I do not think there is a distinct answer but I do think that Ken and Justin would say it has a lot to do money.  It is my assumption that Ken’s family would not have invented such meals if they had other options.  It is also my assumption that Justin’s family did not buy Ziplock because they could not afford it, not because they liked the store brands better. 

As I prepare to go to the market today I am thinking about the items that I need.  In order to prepare my son’s food I need Ziplock freezer bags and store brand snack bags.  Does this mean that I have a confused sense of class identity? Does the fact that I make Jacob’s food make me uppity or money conscious? In class we have discovered there are no easy ways to answer these questions.  And, through my observations of this particular conversation between my husband and his friend I am reminded that if you asked 20 people you would probably get 15 different answers. 

So for now, I will be happy with the knowledge that I am doing what is best for my family with hopes that someday Jacob will say “When I was growing up my mother bought store brand baggies” (not out of a sense of entitlement but from a sense of accomplishment as I hope he does better than my husband and I).

Class Diary #2

Throughout the holiday season I am astounded at what others and I will pay to make someone happy.  The gifts that are purchased due to social norms are extravagant and in most instances outside of one’s personal budget.  This was never made clearer to me than when a former employee of my family business told me how she intended to pay for her son’s gifts.

Apparently there are companies that pray on the misfortune of the minimum wage employees in America by allowing them to take an advance against their expected tax return so that they can have the money to buy presents.  The idea that a person needs to borrow money to buy Christmas gifts should not be that foreign as most people have credit cards which in essence is doing the same thing.  However, the idea of needing to borrow against future tax returns in such a distinct and planned way astounded me.

As a salary employee I know what my income will be each week and I plan my family’s budget accordingly.  The knowledge of this gift getting scheme hammered in the point that not all Americans are as lucky as I am.  I see employees each day who cannot afford to fix their car, pay their medical bills, or leave their child in school after being suspended because they cannot miss one hour of work.  The working poor who take these jobs have no education or the wrong type of education for the available career opportunities. 

It is my belief that a system which enables and possibly forces parents into a situation where they need to borrow against future income tax returns to purchase coveted Christmas gifts is corrupt and unjust.  The fact that the minimum wage in this country is so low that a parent cannot afford the medical bills for his child is astounding.  The class structure of our society which keeps these well meaning people down is so engrained I cannot propose a way around it.  I can, however, hope that one day the rich will be poorer and the poor will be richer and parents will not have to borrow money to provide a simple Christmas gift.

Occupy Wall Street or Occupy Minds

Occupy Wall Street could also be called Occupy Minds…the minds of Americans and forward thinking inhabitants of this world that is.  Class warfare, political disobedience?  Possibly but I believe that this movement is more about being heard and the voice of the people. 

What I have gotten from the dozen or so articles I have read and videos I have watched is that Occupy Wall Street has achieved its goal: to be heard.  No one can quite agree on what main topic is and some people have brought very random topics to the table but all in all America and I am sure the world (who loves when Americans go crazy in large scale) knows that these so called 99% are unhappy. 

I have a political heart and I wish to believe that one person or in this case 100s can make a difference.  I am not convinced, however, that this movement will make a difference.  I believe that the participants will go home unhappy and unfulfilled.  While it is refreshing to see a movement which allows every participant to voice their own concerns a movement such as this is bond to die out before any goals are achieved.

Staying with the theme of our class I must admit that the protestors see class as a fight against corporate elitist who are sucking the life out of the underlings of society versus themselves.  It is hard to buy this as a fully owned feeling, however, when protestors support multi-million dollar companies with the items they own.  As well most Occupy Wall Street “residents” came from outside of the city meaning that they had to use some sort of public or private transportation supported or paid for by federal funds.  At times like these I wonder if some of these protestors are jumping on the band wagon without knowing where the wagon is supposed to be going regardless of it gets there.

I do not believe that there is any foolproof solution to the issues that the protestors have with the current government.  I believe that France has shown that no matter how many times you re-make your republic you cannot find the correct solution unless you re-work society as a whole.  This being said America will not find what it is looking for in a park in New York City, Boston, San Francisco, or any other area of the United States.  I believe that now that their voice has been heard these protestors should go home, run for elections, break our two party system and really make a difference by bringing debate and challenge to our main system of control in this country.  If this were to be done America could have change on an unheard of scale.  If this were to be done the protestors would eventually have a solution to their grievances instead of saying I was once where someone was trying to do something but no one ever knew what that was.

P.S. The Human Microphone reminds me of the game telephone and only moves this protest closer to its failure.