SINCE SO many topics tend to converge on differentiating between which ‘class’ someone is perceived to be from I have decided to make a topic to discuss it.
Despite calls for a true meritocracy, people are so often judged by the house they live in, the money they earn and how wealthy their parents are. It’s obviously an important subject to some here who resent the material possessions acquired by some people whom they deem to be of a lower class.
Footballers get paid a lot, but in the market of world-class football, tens or hundreds of thousands of pounds per week is the going rate. However, Wayne Rooney would probably tell you he’s working class, and he’s certainly had what many would call a working class upbringing, yet he earns over £100,000 per week. When he finishes his career he might well have over £100m in the bank, but he’ll still be working class. Maybe the link between money and class is less clear than sometimes thought.
One particularly common assumption is that everyone that goes to Oxford or Cambridge university is upper class. Indeed these establishments have been called into question for preferring applicants from private schools, such that they now have to discriminate and be seen to be taking people from ‘poorer’ backgrounds. Not very meritocratic. However, why did they prefer private school leavers to state school ones? Could it, heaven forbid, be because they were selected on merit rather than the wealth of their parents and perceived class?
In Britain the equality rules, the tax and welfare system, education and health improvements over the years have equalised many of the gaps in the social spectrum as well as the financial one. There is no longer a financial gap between being on benefits and being a low-paid worker – in fact being on benefits sometimes pays more. The 6 million public sector jobs that now exist have ensured that more people are falling into the same bracket for quality of life.
But class warfare is still rife. If class is not about money or quality of life – what is it about?
Historically it was about the job you did. Working class meant that the culmination of your life consisted of doing repetitive, untaxing tasks for long days and not much money. Unskilled labour. Some people born into the working classes aspired to be middle class but lacked financial means to do so. There was little social mobility.
Education provided the platform for people to enter more free-thinking middle class professional jobs such as accountancy, law and medicine. Of course, this usually required parents with money who were more often than not middle class.
Upper class tended to revolve around money, land or company ownership or more specifically power, hence why the aristocracy has always been always referred to as upper class. Being born in an upper class scenario meant that you were also upper class because you had the power and respect of your parents and were born into the ‘old boys’ club of upper class toffs.
It’s clear from what I have just said how the class system has been diluted in the last decade. If you’re born into a working class environment in the traditional sense, money is not an obstacle in self-betterment. The state provides. Education levels have vastly improved meaning that there is far less social exclusion. It would be nice to think of all state schools as a machine that accept anything and produce well rounded human beings, but this unfortunately is not the case. Some people, despite the leg-up given by the state, still fall by the wayside and end up with the potential or even desire to only carry out working class jobs.
We’ve discussed university a lot on here, and those whom would historically have been excluded 
because they were unable to pay now get a free ride. The ascension from working class to middle class is state assisted at every step. Or is it more that the middle class is falling to meet the working class?
Between 1970 and 2000, there was no change in the ability of children to improve on their parents’ incomes. After 2000, Labour’s taxation of the middle class took hold and compressed them downwards. Is the middle class now in fact the working class?
Upper class is something else and I can’t really define it. It’s a combination of things, not necessarily related to power or money, although both usually feature.
Lets take everyone’s favourite public schoolboy as an example. Why do we always refer to David Cameron as upper class? The immediate thought is because he’s got money. Ask yourself this: if he had no money would he still be upper class?
Yes, it’s the way he speaks, and yes it’s the way he carries himself. He speaks the Queen’s English. He lives his life to the letter of the law. Both of these were fuelled by his upbringing including the top schools he went to. Schools which, unlike most these days, instilled discipline, direction, respect and values.
He does little out of the ordinary and keeps himself to himself. Does he ever look scruffy like John Prescott or Wayne Rooney? Can you imagine him punching a voter, shagging a prostitute, abusing a nation on TV or committing adultery with his secretary? Can you imagine him piling on the pounds and ‘letting himself go’? He is reserved, has great self-control and self-respect, a quality exhibited by most people termed upper class.
And the fact that he’s a descendant of King William IV helps…
loading…
Fantastic article Phil, it does annoy me when class is constantly brought into politics. John Prescott like most Labour MPs like to proudly claim he is ‘working class’ but he is far from it. But my biggest gripe is when lefties use these outdated misguided stereotypes against Conservatives calling them ‘toffs’. I am a stanuch Conservative and I am by no means an ‘upper class millionaire’ I am a hard-working professional with aspirations in life who feels that socialism does me no favours. I back the Conservatives because they represent my political views. I must admit myself I have a tendency to bring class into topics on this board but I feel class and politics should be kept well apart. When Labour supporters and MPs stop using perjorative terms like ‘Tory toff’ I will stop calling Labour MPs champagne socialists.
loading...
John Prescott is working class but happens to have acquired significant money and now leads a champagne lifestyle.
This is down to the job that he had and has now got rather than his ‘class’.
The reason people bring class into politics is because British people are very class conscious.
loading...
I don’t think he is working class at all, he is typical of Labour MPs and trade union chiefs who blast ‘Tory toffs’ and ‘millionaire cabinets’ yet live extravagant lifestyles themselves. Prescott is the sort of guy who goes into working men’s clubs (for the media) acting like he is the ‘ordinary bloke down the pub’ then goes home to his mansion in his Jaguar and has nothing in common with those people. But what is most laughable is that these people eat it all up.
loading...
You’ve demonstrated that he’s a champagne socialist – and he is. But this doesn’t mean he isn’t working class.
Having lots of money doesnt mean you’re upper class. That’s a Labour point of view!
loading...
He certainly is a champagne socialist, good point. I agree having lots of money doesn’t make you upper class. That’s why it annoys me when people call Mr Cameron ‘upper class’. I don’t feel he and his wife are ‘upper class’, they have both worked hard to get where they are and I admire that. Someone like Prince Harry is a prime example of upper class, as much as he denies it living a life of luxury at the taxpayer’s expense.
loading...
If Harry is upper class, so is Cameron. Both are descent from royalty and obviously one still is royalty.
I don’t think the jobs they do are relevant to their class.
loading...
John Prescott is a fat lazy inept piss stinking CUNT, and he has no class.
loading...
TB David and Samantha Cameron are as upper class as it gets! Both are members of Britains aristocracy. Samantha is from the reknowned Astor family. I agree with most of what Phil says on here but he must have been using Daves white powder when he wrote:- “He lives his life to the letter of the law.” with reference to Cameron! don’t forget he was an active member of the Bullingdon club whilst at Oxford.
loading...
Present tense Jon!
Not seen him in the News of the World for shagging a granny yet!
loading...
For legal reasons (and the fact that Cameron is in charge of MI5, the police and the armed forces!) i’ll refrain from commenting on what he was up to VERY recently at a private party!
loading...
china
loading...
Its not so much as about economics etc its more about character,and the politts/yusufs etc are pond life and need a dose of “arbeit macht frei”.
There are 2 classes of people,regardless of wealth status etc: PROPER PEOPLE and SCUM.
loading...
Phils right when he says money has nothing to do with what class people are. Is it seen as what job you do and not how much money you get from it?
For example True Blackpian was on the gazette saying how because of his nursing degree, which has allowed him to enter a Profession (by this I think he means regulated by a outside body and on a register), he considers himself middle class. He has a valid point there because his wage would be no more then 25-26K now there are many people who are not in a Profession who earn greatly more then he does but they will still class themselves as working class.
So money is nothing to do with your class so just because you have money I can’t see how this classifies you as a champagne socialist, surly a champagne socialist is someone who has come from family money who puts on a working class accent says people are equal then go’s home and sacks his butler for not putting toothpaste on his brush properly.
Now a nurse on 26K would not be able to afford to live in a nice middle class area so its not where you live which says if you are middle class or not.
As for phils “He does little out of the ordinary and keeps himself to himself. Does he ever look scruffy like John Prescott or Wayne Rooney? Can you imagine him punching a voter, shagging a prostitute, abusing a nation on TV or committing adultery with his secretary? Can you imagine him piling on the pounds and ‘letting himself go’? He is reserved, has great self-control and self-respect,” this could describe me (I think) but I don’t see myself as upper class.
In other words the class system is based on perception and not on any facts its about being a snob and I don’t mean that just one way if you feel your upper class then you are a snob but there are people who “are working class and proud of it” and look down their nose at other classes. I personal feel the class system is a load of crap and people who want to classify themselves in the class system shouldn’t and I will admit class my views as working class and I am probably an idiot for doing this as well but that’s British culture for you.
loading...
I’m middle class and proud – well educated with a good degree and professional qualfications. Class certainly doesn’t equal money though. I was at school with someone upper class whose family owned the “manor” and this meant lots of land, tenants, lots of well connected public school friends and family a huge house and most of it closed up because they didn’t have the money to keep it out of the repair status akin to a squat. Similarly there are many working class people who have lots of money. Class is something you’re born with – education can raise you into middle class (especially with a second generation) but there’s little other movement going to happen.
loading...
I would describe myself as working class or shop keeper class (there is a new one), I grew up in a council estate and my dad ran a chip shop but he gave me pride and he gave me a can do spirit that needs to exist with those that run their own businesses.
loading...
I am remedial class lol but theres no remedy for headcases like me,lol.
loading...