I used to take pride in America's relative lack of class consciousness. Unlike Europe and Latin America, people in the US, as a general rule, don't like to overtly call attention to how much money they make. Most Americans, rich and poor alike, prefer a casual, practical style of dress. T-shirts and jeans work for corporate CEOs as well as plumbers. It's considered an honor to have friends from different socioeconomic backgrounds. And you hardly ever hear anyone talk seriously about High Class Culture in tones that aren't ridiculing. Our popular films make fun of snobbery and, while we sometimes laugh at them, the icons of our culture have often been everyday Joes--alias Homer Simpsons or Ralph Kramdens or Mr. Smiths or Davy Crocketts. We even require a certain level (or pretense) of "average Joeness" in our elected leaders.
But recently I've come to see the "average Joe" phenomenon a little differently. While America, the culture not the government, does propagate a positive respect for the everyman, I no longer think lacking class consciousness is something to brag about. It's exactly the opposite, actually--a cause for fear and shame. The sad truth is that lacking class consciousness means next to nothing if you're not also lacking class divisions. And class divisions are pronounced and ubiquitous features of American culture. In truth, American class divisions might be even sterner and more constant than they are in other countries because in America they aren't honestly looked at or analyzed. Our culture keeps them hidden and thereby protected.
Take the phrase "special interests", for example. We love to complain about the excessive governmental influence of "special interests", but, literally speaking, "special interests" don't have undue or excessive influence at all. The homeless are a special interest group and no one suggests that they have too much influence on government policy. Same goes for migrant farm workers and single mothers and artists and scrabble players. The phrase "special interests" is an unequivocal euphemism. What we really mean to say is "the ruling class". But we won't say that because if we did we would have to face the reality that our government is run by the same upper class grinches we love to ridicule in popular films and culture--that the term American democracy is just a euphemism for plutocracy--that the American government cares more about corporations than individual citizens. If we call the elites special interests groups, we can safely keep fiction and reality separate. We can continue to champion the average Joe without having to actually act (or vote) in his interests. The government (with even more ease than before thanks to the Supreme Court's recent decision) can continue to represent corporate interests at everyone else's expense, for if we dared realize that the fictional Mr. Burns-and-Mr. Potter-run America is more real than the one we mistake for reality, then one or the other America would have to be destroyed: the culture or the government. So, instead, one serves to hide and enable the other, to point to the truth only as a fictional gimmick while the real gimmick masquerades as truth, and everyone sleeps peacefully.
Wasting time..
2 months ago
9 comments:
This is really well written and offers accessible yet incisive critiques--you should publish it somewhere. And, btw, why don't you have other readers on here other than our little exmo group? (and even they ain't reading right now) Is it that Coloradoans don't blog? Just wondering.
I love this line: "the sad truth is that lacking class consciousness means next to nothing if you're not also lacking class divisions." I mean you could run a campaign on this--you'd lose but...
And this (see below) is pure artistry, so right on I immediately pictured a dozen scenes in movies that ridicule as a way of taking attention off our own aristocracy. Now that's hegemony perfected.
**The phrase "special interests" is an unequivocal euphemism. What we really mean to say is "the ruling class". But we won't say that because if we did we would have to face the reality that our government is run by the same upper class grinches we love to ridicule in popular films and culture--that the term American democracy is just a euphemism for plutocracy--that the American government cares more about corporations than individual citizens."**
Thanks for the good words, CI. And, yeah, our exmo blogger crew seems to be pretty inactive of late. HH? Spontaneous? I miss you guys! Then again, I haven't been super active myself, at least in terms of writing new posts.
As for Colorado bloggers, I only know of one friend who has a blog (the Tango dancer on my bloglist). I have a couple other friends who check my blog out on occasion and chat with me about my entries (you know who you are) but never leave comments. Hint hint.
Grateful that you're still stopping by, though!
Oh, yes, I agree the US has a ruling class that we refuse to acknowledge!!!
Sometime ago I either heard or read, unfortunately I can't remember where i picked up this thought, that it is the "American Dream" that prevents us from acknowledging the truth. The average American believes that it is really possible for anyone to enter the elite class and therefore imagines there is no barrier between "classes".
In my more cranky moment, I think that really there is just one world ruling class who have more in common with each other than they do with the people they rule; and we are all just their pawns. They use concepts like nationalism and "national security" to convince us what they do is in our interest instead of their interest.
But having said all this I have to wonder about Obama. It seems that even though he joined ruling class being president of the USA does not promote him to the head of that Class.
Oh dear I got carried away meant to say: THanks for the stimulating post Shane and thanks Counterintuitive for your thoughts - you are right more people need to be discussing these topics!
You didn't get carried away at all! That's exactly the kind of comment that motivates me to keep blogging.
You wrote:
it is the "American Dream" that prevents us from acknowledging the truth. The average American believes that it is really possible for anyone to enter the elite class and therefore imagines there is no barrier between "classes".
That's well put. I think that's exactly what it is. I see this attitude in my students all the time. They think that by working hard and adopting the values of the ruling class, they automatically become an elite member or at least ensure their future membership. I saw the same thing with my students in the Cty. Jail. Very odd to see the lowest and most oppressed class in our culture so dauntlessly conformist in their values. And I think a lot of people in our culture simply believe that the economic elites ARE better and therefore emulate and support them even though they hold out little hope that they'll ever join them as equals.
As for Obama, he certainly isn't the "head of the class" all of a sudden, but his actions as president clearly show whose side he's on. You can't get elected in this country if you're not on that side. He's kind of the perfect face for corporate power--someone who gives credence to the lie we've been talking about. Now more than ever, even black people can see themselves as elite members in good standing or just awaiting formal induction--and thereby support interests that cheat them out of legitimate opportunities.
SE is here. Nice post Shane! So, what I think you're saying is that American class divisions aren't so much different than other countries which have more distinct and honest class divisions, but we have disowned the obvious truth (that class systems are very much in place in the US of A and one rises through the ranks not by so much by grit and ambition but more through luck, money, and birth right) in favor of protecting our pretense that we are the land of the free, the bold and the brave. But we are a land with gross inequalities...look at public education for just one example. I can imagine the white cracker neighborhood school that my kids attend looks quite different from one in a poor black community in Ohio. In fact, I might be bold enough to say the root of where our class distinctions and inequalities are found is in our disparite places of learning and opportunity. To be more specific...what would we find if we compare the quality of the facility, the safety of the facility, the adequacy of the instruction, the access to curriculum materials, the support of the community, the ability for supplemental and extracurricular activities, access to higher education,etc. Does all this disparity stem more from the intrastructure itself or the difference in the support and expectations of the local community. If a child is expected to read, write, study, learn, graduate, and go on to college vs. no one is paying much attention to your education and the status quo is to drop out and get pregnant before the age of 16 anyway. To be honest...I don't know what you would find in comparison. I just know that there is a huge difference in the success rates of kids in predominately black, poor neighborhoods vs. white "upper class" neighborhoods. Wow, even I had to put that in quotes because I'm so uncomfortable with the phrase upper class. (hey..no quotes! I'm getting better). I had to disown this in my very own comment. I am as guilty of this disownment as anyone.
But, to play devils advocate a bit, I'll bring in a little objectivsm via Ayn Rand. (who I suspect is one of your favorite authors!)...and just throw out there...where does one place the dividing line between the individual and the cultural context and even (dare I say) individual responsibility from which this all stems.
Ayn might say that your argument ignores the responsibility of the individual in shaping his or her own destiny.
"Man is a rational being. Reason, as man's only means of knowledge, is his basic means of survival. But the exercise of reason depends on each individual's choice. "Man is a being of volitional consciousness." "That which you call your soul or spirit is your consciousness, and that which you call 'free will' is your mind's freedom to think or not, the only will you have, your only freedom. This is the choice that controls all the choices you make and determines your life and character."Thus Objectivism rejects any form of determinism, the belief that man is a victim of forces beyond his control (such as God, fate, upbringing, genes, or economic conditions)
I'll underline...economic conditions here.
Believe me, I'm not quoting this because I'm a fan or an advocate although it does make me pause and at least consider it. I'm quite interested to how you would respond. If you ask me how I would respond, I'd say if you are going to ascertain that everyone use their reason and choice equally, then you would have to assume an equal access to choice, and in our situation, that just isn't the case. Which is kinda what you are saying in your post. Am I right?
Whew... This is what happens when I stay away too long. I need to pace myself!
Hey SE! Glad to have you back, and with such a long juicy comment.
I completely agree that educational inequality is at the basis of classism. It has always amazed me that this isn't a bigger issue with people--that people from poorer neighborhoods aren't raising all kinds of ruckus about that.
As for Ayn Rand, as you guessed, I don't think much of her. I disagree with her on several fundamental levels, so I'll limit my response to just a few: one, the idea that truth, or reality, exists independent of human consciousness. I don't disagree, entirely. There's much truth that is beyond our consciousness, but consciousness is part of the universe, too. Two, the assumption that reality can be fathomed by human reason (which I think contradicts her first point, since human reason is part of consciousness). I see very little evidence of this. And if that were true, reality would be far less interesting than it is. Undoubtedly, reason is a component of the world, but it certainly isn't limited to reason, either. "There is more on heaven and earth than is dreamt of in your philosophy." I think the delusion that reason can explain the world is every control-freak's dream (and Ayn Rand was definitely a control freak) but reality isn't influenced by the dreams of control freaks--and it isn't anthropomorphic. Another Rand delusion is the concept of "individuality", as in an individuality that creates the world but isn't, in turn, created by the world. It sounds to me a lot like the traditional notion of the "soul". Oh, I could go on and on, but, to be honest, it's hard for me to take Ayn Rand seriously. It's kind of like arguing with a Mormon--not really worth the effort.
So when are you gonna give up that foul temptress Facebook and give us another long, rambling, and creative blog entry?
Did I tell you I was in an Ayn Rand Objectivism group in graduate school? But I only attended a couple meetings so I'm not sure it really counts, plus I was mainly there to meet guys. ( I was drawn to the philosophical types...somethings never change). I was enticed into the amnesty international letter writing group but the guy who enticed me there decided he was gay, so I'd have to say both experiments were a failure. I ended up joining the waterpolo team instead and then the alternative film society. But can't say I got any dates from any of these. It was Logan after all.... I should have joined the 4H club. What was I thinking. Then again, Logan has produced some great minds, yours for example. Shane you talk circles around me. I wish I could keep up intellectually.
Can we consider this a blog post? Actually, I've got post brewing as we speak. My third generation blog has been severely neglected. Facebook has it's purposes but it's cheap and easy. Less satisfying.
Not to detract from your marvelous post....but I'm really really sorry to hear about your car incident. Even though your car was the just sitting there minding its own business. Uninsured drunk drivers totally suck. I'm really sad it also means you have one less trip to UT. I'm looking forward to May when you make it back.
Now back to plutocracy....
LOL! This cracks me up: "I was enticed into the amnesty international letter writing group but the guy who enticed me there decided he was gay, so I'd have to say both experiments were a failure. I ended up joining the waterpolo team instead and then the alternative film society. But can't say I got any dates from any of these. It was Logan after all.... I should have joined the 4H club. What was I thinking"
Thanks for the good healthy laugh to start my morning!!! I miss those little gems of yours. Glad to hear you've got another blog brewing.
And yes, uninsured drunk drivers can be a drag. I kinda felt sorry for her until I realized her insurance had expired and I had to foot the bill. It's been quite a pain! I think I'll be driving again by this afternoon, though.
Post a Comment