Class mobility in a classless society?

[merkur]

..

 

[dusty]

Class is now more about taste than economic status. There was a decent article in the Atlantic about this a few months ago.

 

[merkur]

..

 

[constant struggle]

could that author be any more pretentious... he is worse than the X'ers themselves!

 

[flashback]

I think we definitely still have classes, although they probably don't matter much in the grand scheme. To some people its about money, and as someone else said some think its about taste. I believe that it's about the way you act, your values & morals. How you are, I guess. To that end, someone with little money and a job that is usually seen as low-class can still be classy. Its common sense for the most part, but the things I think that can make a person classy regardless of other factors is the way they dress - regardless of if it is cheap or used clothing, nothing gaudy or tacky eg. name brands prominently displayed, a strong vocabulary & literacy, does not use swear words frequently, disinterest in celebrity "news" & reality tv, no disgusting habits, comfortable with who they are, not trying to be someone else or live up to societal pressures. Someone that is very secure and their own person, lives by their own refined standards. It has something to do with taste, but taste isn't everything.

 

[dusty]

Originally Posted by merkur

Is this the article: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200903/class-system ?

Hey, I said it was decent.

 

[RyJ Maduro]

Originally Posted by merkur

Is this the article: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200903/class-system ?

Tartan flannel shirt= Poor.

Tartan flannel trousers= Rich.

 

[aizan]

read a book. read this book. in any case, hunter/gatherer societies are the only classless societies.

 

[unicornwarrior]

Usually within sociology (at the most basic levels), social classes are defined by occupations, education, and the lifestyles associated with those levels of education, etc. It's rarely defined by money; or more specifically, by salaries. Technically a "working class" man can make more money than an "upper middle-class" man. Due to situations like this, their lifestyle choices, education, etc define their place on the social strata.



that's just my take on the subject.



I honestly wouldn't argue "taste" plays a role in it, as "taste" is subjective and can't really be measured. I'm very familiar with several upper-class people who have what I would consider terrible taste.

A lower class member of society will not be part of the upper class simply because he "class". The definition of the word is being misused here. Class, in this subject, is a category in the social strata; "classy" is simply a ridiculous adjective that says nothing about one's "class". Personally, I'd shoot for "sophisticated".

 

[bluemagic]

Originally Posted by RyJ Maduro

Tartan flannel shirt= Poor.

Tartan flannel trousers= Rich.

Slim tartan flannel shirt = creative class