So, What’s Wrong With Being Working Class, Anyway?
by Sidney Carton
While listening to the Vice-Presidential debates in rerun this morning, a co-worker of mine exploded in wrath. No, it wasn’t Sarah Palin’s answers, or Joe Biden’s unwillingness to rip into her on them that earned his ire, it was the use of a particular term to which we have all become accustomed to this year… Middle Class. We have heard numerous mentions of the middle class this year, we have heard that they are endangered, that they are the engine that drives our economy, that a stable middle class is a key element in ensuring the continued existence of Democracy, et cetera, ad nauseaum…
My co-worker’s question, which I find both important and compelling, is “What’s the big deal about the middle class?” and further “Why doesn’t any mention the working class?” His question touches on a key paradox in the American psyche, no one wants to admit to being working class themselves. Sure, we boast about “working class parents” or “growing up in a blue-collar household,” but ask many Americans where they put themselves, and you will get answers that range from “lower middle class” to “middle class” to “upper middle class” those who claim to be “working class” are few and far between.
I believe that the reasons for these answers have a lot to do with ingrained prejudices in our national culture. The Puritans believed that God’s “elect” were so distinguished by the worldly riches that he had allowed them to gain in this life, an idea that continues down through the generations to the “prosperity gospel” of today. On the other hand, only the truly rich, who are either unwilling or unable to hide their wealth actually admit to being in the privileged classes, the rest try to hold on, as carefully as possible to the title of “upper middle class” in the interests of avoiding charges of elitism. Also present here is the influence of the post-1945 rise of middle class homeowners, courtesy of the GI Bill. There was something seemingly wholesome, patriotic, moral and industrious about the rising middle class of the suburbs. These people were portrayed as the backbone of the nation, the stable and trustworthy demographic (Nixon’s “silent majority” anyone?) in comparison to the dissolute and elitist rich and the crime-ridden and volatile urban poor. Hence being middle class was more authentically “American” than being rich, but still respectable enough to be aspired to.
As to class identity, much of this depends on the way we measure class. My co-worker, who has read many of the works of Marx, identifies class in accordance with a person’s relation to production. This is an excellent yardstick, but also an involved one. Most people react better to numbers, hence we come up with a scale of earnings to determine where we fall on the social hierarchy. The current absolute floor for the lower middle class hovers at an approximately $32,000 yearly income. My gross income puts me just barely over that mark, but I really can’t consider myself middle class, after all I own no home, and live paycheck-to-paycheck. Sadly, many of those in this country who do consider themselves middle class live no better than I, and many find themselves in serious straits regarding debt. Perhaps it is time for us to reconsider our class identities, for there is truly nothing either dishonorable, nor pejorative in being working class. Indeed, it is a canon of scripture that ” The laborer is worthy of his hire.” If they are worthy of their hire, then they are worthy of respect, and we had better learn that respect soon, for even if we don’t want to admit it, most of us are working class.
Thanks for the thoughtful post. I do agree that thinking about class in relation to production is involved (where do lawyers/doctors fit it–they aren’t working class, but they also aren’t part of the owning class, in general). It’s mostly just important to talk about it and to not fall into the trap that working class means blue collar only. And then there are many people who grew up working class but are now part of the middle class and that can be confusing emotionally.
I did find it funny that Palin goes on about being working class (“my husband is a member of the steelworkers union” — when they’re income is at least three figures and then in the debates talks about how she’s always been solidly middle class. Confusing!
Thanks.
This is supposed to be a class free society. Material possessions are not the measure of an individual’s worth. Marxist class conflict has no place in American society or politics. There is no downside to working for a living. Honest work done well and reasonably rewarded is good work regardless of the dollars involved. To suggest that an individual has more social standing because of his wealth is to deny the fundamental equality that Americans believe in. Politicians use labels like “class” to divide and conflict. If you want to segregate by earnings, what is a reasonable salary in Alabama would not pay the rent on a hovel in NYC, or the food bill in Alaska. So what then is middle class? A mirage generated by political hot air. The truth is that what hurts any economic level impacts on all. Wealthy people spend money on things that many of us make so we can feed our families. Poor people spend money on the necessities of life that many of us grow or make to put food on our own tables. This isn’t about class warfare, it is about survival.
Really interesting; in the UK (where I live) many more people self-identify as working class. Your blog makes an interesting contrast with the way people myself and a fellow researcher have described themselves (see http://www.voicesofpostwarengland.com, also a wordpress blog)