Social classes still matter in Britain

[gaijinalways]

No, I was saying these people don't have expensive property (usually in my book, overevaluated property), so more of their wealth is in cash, bonds, stock, etc. And they are usually are small business owners/workers, so they often do a lot of the manual work in their business, hence they are 'working class' millionaires.

 

[Kinsao]

Ah, I see, you are referring to someone who is (for example) a carpet-cleaner by profession and owns/manages a carpet-cleaning business - rather than simply someone who cleans their own carpet at home. In England, someone who was a millionnaire from having built up a successful carpet-cleaning business would be looked at differently from someone who was a millionnaire on inheritance and had a title to go with it. Although I can't exactly say what the difference is. :bluush: And of course, there are a lot of people who turn up their noses at people with inherited wealth and say "they never had to work for it", too. But I think the carpet-cleaner would get more respect for their profession and their success in America. My feeling is that they would be admired in America for having made a success. In England they might also be admired for being successful and rich, but certainly in some circles there would be a distinct lingering feeling of "s/he's only a carpet-cleaner, after all..." :bluush:

 

[Maciamo]

Ah, I see, you are referring to someone who is (for example) a carpet-cleaner by profession and owns/manages a carpet-cleaning business - rather than simply someone who cleans their own carpet at home. In England, someone who was a millionnaire from having built up a successful carpet-cleaning business would be looked at differently from someone who was a millionnaire on inheritance and had a title to go with it.

And this is exactly why I was trying to explain that classes do not depend on money. You are born into a class, and you will remain in it, even if you win the lottery. In fact, if someone wins the lottery, the way they will use the money is often a good reflection of their class values.

 

[Minty]

I believe I know French culture better than you, being a native speaker of French, having watched French TV (and debates) since my childhood, having had an education very close to the one in France, having been all around France, having had French friends (and girlfriends) and being confused for a French in Paris and for a Parisian (or at least Northerner) outside Paris... How long have you lived in France ? There is virtually no difference between the way people see the class system in French-speaking Belgium and France - maybe less than between French- and Dutch-speaking Belgium.

And I believe my husband knows French better than you. He is born in France and has lived in France almost all of his life. As for his parents one is Northern Italian the other is Belge (French side).

No offence but he says in France it is a very egalitarian society, people don't look down at you because of your jobs unlike in Chinese societies for example. It's true in France you need to hide your wealth if you do have money.

That's why when he showed up in his carpenters and laborer friends' houses with a luxurious watch, their wives were very jealous.

French don't really care about royalties and they are not very religious, even though there are tones of church left from their past constructions.

EDIT: If I am not mistaken from memory, in the Chinese forum somewhere you have mentioned before the Belgium people do put organs on sale on glass windows and you don't think there is any difference in France but my husband says no, they don't do that in France. That's why he was very upset to have seen that in Taiwan. I think you seem to think the French side of Belgium is more similar to France than what my husband thinks.

 

[Maciamo]

And I believe my husband knows French better than you. He is born in France and has lived in France all his life. As for his parents one is Northern Italian the other is Belge (French side). No offence but he says in France it is a very egalitarian society, people don't look down at you because of your jobs unlike in Chinese societies for example. It's true in France you need to hide your wealth if you do have money.

I don't think that your husband's ancestry proves that he understands French society better than me (and even less you). Understanding requires an interest in the matter (sociology) at first, as well as knowledge and analytical skills. It is a myth that France is an egalitarian society just because the national motto is "Liberté, égalité, fraternité". France is one of the most unequal societies in Europe, certainly the most hierarchical and elitist, and the one with the strongest power distance. You can only understand that through cross-cultural studies (and this requires an international experience). It is true that people don't look down at you because of your jobs or respect you because you have money, and this is exactly what I have been trying to tell you about the meaning of social classes in Europe. European social classes are about the mind (values, tastes, manners, education...), not a person's job or wealth.

Believe me, French speakers are not egalitarian when it comes to classes. They may not care about money and display of material wealth (clothes, cars), but the way you speak and what you believe in is a major factor of division in France and Belgium. Someone who has graduated from ENA does not socialise with ordinary folk. Middle class French people see Arabic immigrants who speak with a strong "rap-like" accent, wearing a cap back-front and have no respect for anything, as an underclass to avoid. But classes in Europe are not so numerous, and the main types of mindset can be divided in only 4 categories, like in my classification in #1 here. 80-90% of French people of European descent being middle class in this classification, it is fairly normal that some French people might think of their society as pretty egalitarian - but only as long as they remain in their class !

They are not very religious, even though there are tones of church left from their past constructions.

Same in Belgium, and most of Europe. What's your point ? What does this have to do with social classes ?

 

[Minty]

I don't think that your husband's ancestry proves that he understands French society better than me (and even less you). Understanding requires an interest in the matter (sociology) at first, as well as knowledge and analytical skills. It is a myth that France is an egalitarian society just because the national motto is "Liberté, égalité, fraternité". France is one of the most unequal societies in Europe, certainly the most hierarchical and elitist, and the one with the strongest power distance. You can only understand that through cross-cultural studies (and this requires an international experience).

You don't have to get so excited, I did say no offence, and I am stating my opinion on what I think.

What do you mean by international experiences? Are you talking about your experiences of living overseas?

It is true that people don't look down at you because of your jobs or respect you because you have money, and this is exactly what I have been trying to tell you about the meaning of social classes in Europe. European social classes are about the mind (values, tastes, manners, education...), not a person's job or wealth.

I do understand what you have been saying it just that I don't fully agree that's how social class works in the world.

Believe me, French speakers are not egalitarian when it comes to classes. They may not care about money and display of material wealth (clothes, cars), but the way you speak and what you believe in is a major factor of division in France and Belgium. Someone who has graduated from ENA does not socialise with ordinary folk.

Yes in most cases, just like the example I have given about how often do you see a Harvard graduate socialize with a high school drop out?

Middle class French people see Arabic immigrants who speak with a strong "rap-like" accent, wearing a cap back-front and have no respect for anything, as an underclass to avoid. But classes in Europe are not so numerous, and the main types of mindset can be divided in only 4 categories, like in my classification in #1 here. 80-90% of French people of European descent being middle class in this classification, it is fairly normal that some French people might think of their society as pretty egalitarian - but only as long as they remain in their class !
Same in Belgium, and most of Europe.

Hmmm middle class French see Arabs as the underrace rather than underclass. Yes many middle class French are racists, but racism are everywhere.

Yes there are also the manners, how you think, and your education hence the way you behave, your intelligence hence the way you interact with people which betoken what kind of person you are inside. These behaviors can be used as a yardstick to indicate your social class.

If French think they are an egalitarian society that's because France is a republic and not a kingdom.

What's your point ? What does this have to do with social classes ?

Sorry I got this thread mix up with the other one where you are talking about what divides people more? Religion, social class, intelligence, or gender?

 

[gaijinalways]

Kinsao posted

Ah, I see, you are referring to someone who is (for example) a carpet-cleaner by profession and owns/manages a carpet-cleaning business - rather than simply someone who cleans their own carpet at home.

Exactly, thought that was pretty clear, my apologies if it wasn't.
Maciamo posted

And this is exactly why I was trying to explain that classes do not depend on money. You are born into a class, and you will remain in it, even if you win the lottery. In fact, if someone wins the lottery, the way they will use the money is often a good reflection of their class values.

But my point was different. Very few in America would look down on these self-made millionaires who have made the money themselves. Hence, this seems to go aganist what the Economist article states (or aganist the findings of the studies mentioned), that

Originally Posted by The Economist
Recent international studies indicate that British social strata are a bit more flexible than America's but more rigid than in many European countries.

As kinsao was stating earlier, some British people would look down on them, whereas an American would only look down on them if they thought the people were crooks, something the legions in the law occupation seems to suffer from in the US.

 

[Maciamo]

You don't have to get so excited, I did say no offence, and I am stating my opinion on what I think.

What annoys me is not that you state your opinion but :

1) that you assume that you or your husband necessarily know better French culture, society or mentality because you live in France (well in a region that used to be German until recently).

2) that I explained before that the meaning of "social class" was different in Europe from North America, Australian and East Asia, but you keep using your Asian definition to talk about France.

What do you mean by international experiences? Are you talking about your experiences of living overseas?

You never understand your country's culture as well as when you go abroad and compare it with other countries. Naturally, reading authoritative cultural studies also help.

Hmmm middle class French see Arabs as the underrace rather than underclass.

I wouldn't go that far. There are many North African (esp. Algerian) scholars, journalists or other intellectuals in France that are well respected. Those who are seen as an underclass are the economic migrants with little education and rough manners that already belonged to the lower class in their country before moving to France. Naturally a lower class in a developing country (and their offspring) ranks even lower than a lower class in a developed country where education is free and compulsory for everyone. That is what I was trying to say. Educated Muslims tend to be much more moderate and do not pose problems to society. But the majority of the Maghreban immigrants are very definitely bottom lower class by Western European standards.

If French think they are an egalitarian society that's because France is a republic and not a kingdom.

That's one of the most non-sensical thing you have said about social classes. The most egalitarian countries in Europe tend to be monarchies : Norway, Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands. Spain is also more egalitarian than France or Italy.

 

[Minty]

What annoys me is not that you state your opinion but :
1) that you assume that you or your husband necessarily know better French culture, society or mentality because you live in France (well in a region that used to be German until recently).
2) that I explained before that the meaning of "social class" was different in Europe from North America, Australian and East Asia, but you keep using your Asian definition to talk about France.

Well, if that's what I gave you the impression of what I am doing, that's not my intention at all.

I think my husband understands his own society well is because he is not an uneducated man.

I know social class defers from country to country region to region, you say I keep on using my Asian definition to talk about France.

You did the same you assumed the Malays and the Indonesians are the same as the Middle Eastern because they are all Muslims and you are generalizing them because of their religion coming from a Western perspective. You acted as if though you understand the country I am born into better than I do, but I didn't get upset over it; I simply just explain to you they are not the same as the Middle Eastern.

You never understand your country's culture as well as when you go abroad and compare it with other countries. Naturally, reading authoritative cultural studies also help.

Well, although my husband never formally lived abroad, he has been sent as an expatriate to Thailand and HK before. He used to fly back and forth many times then. They even gave him an apartment each there. He has had girlfriends from different Asian countries as well. It is not as if though he never socialized outside of his French that is a German influenced society.

I, on the other hand have lived in many different countries, and I think I do have international experiences. I have not read too many cross cultural study though.

I wouldn't go that far. There are many North African (esp. Algerian) scholars, journalists or other intellectuals in France that are well respected. Those who are seen as an underclass are the economic migrants with little education and rough manners that already belonged to the lower class in their country before moving to France. Naturally a lower class in a developing country (and their offspring) ranks even lower than a lower class in a developed country where education is free and compulsory for everyone. That is what I was trying to say. Educated Muslims tend to be much more moderate and do not pose problems to society. But the majority of the Maghreban immigrants are very definitely bottom lower class by Western European standards.

Yes, I supposed when I made that comment, I don't mean all of the Arabs, even in very impoverished societies there are intelligent high respectable people. But there are a lot of Arabs here who are trouble makers. I agree there is social class in France and it is not as egalitarian as they imagine. But I know there are certain numbers of Middle class French who see the majority of Maghreban immigrants as the lower race.

You cannot denied racism exists, I am sure there are people in the world who see the Chinese as the underrace ( very offensive but I know but they exist), or the blacks as the under race...etc.

That's one of the most non-sensical thing you have said about social classes. The most egalitarian countries in Europe tend to be monarchies : Norway, Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands. Spain is also more egalitarian than France or Italy.

I don't know about all those countries you have mentioned. In Australia we are not require to study about them, some of them I have visited but just one or two days in those countries I obviously wouldn?ft know much about them from just visiting.

However I do believe the average French are not very class conscious, sort of like the average Australian. However Australian and French are quite different.

 

[Minty]

Kinsao posted

Maciamo posted
But my point was different. Very few in America would look down on these self-made millionaires who have made the money themselves. Hence, this seems to go aganist what the Economist article states (or aganist the findings of the studies mentioned), that
As kinsao was stating earlier, some British people would look down on them, whereas an American would only look down on them if they thought the people were crooks, something the legions in the law occupation seems to suffer from in the US.

I actually find this contradictory. Besides royalty, you cannot be born into your father's medicine degree or your father's lawyer degree. If you want to be a doctor or a lawyer and other professionals you need to graduate from the degree it cannot be inherited unlike royal blood. Conversely, a farmer's son can possibly become a doctor if he graduates from Medicine degree.

You know my husband agrees with your American view that people here would only look down at you if they thought you were crooks.

 

[Maciamo]

However I do believe the average French are not very class conscious, sort of like the average Australian. However Australian and French are quite different.

I agree to say that the French, like most continental Europeans, are not very class conscious. But that doesn't mean that classes don't exist just because people don't care much about them. Let's say that the French probably don't talk much about class differences (not as much as the Brits), but their behaviour (e.g. way of socialising, choice of school, choice of neighbourhood) is nonetheless directed by class distinction.

I know from TV debates, political decisions and personal experience that French speakers both in France and Belgium have been trying to discourage class discrimination, and this has resulted to a sort of taboo for all discussions about social classes.

This was part of a general trend of liberalism and even laissez-faire towar younger generations from the 1970's onwards. Parents have been encouraging their children to marry anybody they love regardless of their class (resulting in more divorces), to study anything they like at school/university regardless of market opportunities (that's why there are so many unemployed university graduates in France and Belgium)...

Parents say that they want their children's happiness by letting them do whatever they want, but the truth is that it is easier for them not to take responsibility in telling them what to do, and let the children learn from their own experiences and failures. This is also why society has become more individualistic, but also why so many young people have lost their landmarks and waste so much time trying to figure what they want to do with their lives. This is the result of a too liberal society, where values inherited from the past and from religion have disappeared for new personalised values. But there are things that do not change, even in a religion-free and liberal society : social classes.

I understand the political will to "reconciliate" classes, but this can only be done by improving education for everyone at home and at school. Because there will always be big disparities in education, class differences will continue to exist, whether people wish it or not. It is not by refraining to talk about class differences and allowing one's children to marry "anyboby" that society will be better off. Understand class differences is, on the contrary, the key to prevent class conflicts, in the same way that learning about other religions may help understand the way others think.

 

[Maciamo]

I actually find this contradictory. Besides royalty, you cannot be born into your father's medicine degree or your father's lawyer degree. If you want to be a doctor or a lawyer and other professionals you need to graduate from the degree it cannot be inherited unlike royal blood.

In general, if the parents are wealthy and well educated, the children will be raised with a good education and will be used to a more refined way of life, with better manners than average, speaking with a posher accent, and having tastes and values that reflect these higher standards. This is all the truer if the children went to a school with people from the same social level as theirs, so as not to corrupt their manners, language and tastes.

The parents, however, may not have such bourgeois way of speaking or manners, even if they are doctors or lawyers, if they were born into a lower social class. I have personally noticed that very, very few people jump more than 1 level of the 4 main social classes (upper, upper-middle, middle, lower) in their lifetime. If you are born in a middle class milieu, you could raise yourself to upper-middle class or fall to lower class, but rarely I have seen a person from a lower class milieu becoming upper-middle class, or someone from a middle class milieu becoming upper class (the other way round is easier though). In the most extreme cases, such a change normally takes place over 2 generations.

Conversely, a farmer's son can possibly become a doctor if he graduates from Medicine degree.

Do you mean farmer (landowner) or peasant (just working the land) ? Farmers are a special cases in social classes; I know some that are typically lower class, others that are middle class, and a few that are nearly upper-middle class.

 

[Minty]

I agree to say that the French, like most continental Europeans, are not very class conscious. But that doesn't mean that classes don't exist just because people don't care much about them. Let's say that the French probably don't talk much about class differences (not as much as the Brits), but their behaviour (e.g. way of socialising, choice of school, choice of neighbourhood) is nonetheless directed by class distinction.

I didn't say they don't exist, I say the French don't think they exist and they don't pay a lot of attention to social class, like the Americans. That's why you don't get people looking down at another person if he does manual work for a living in France. However, if they think you are some kind of crook who conducts criminal activities they do look down at you, that?fs why the Arabs here are not liked by the French.

I know from TV debates, political decisions and personal experience that French speakers both in France and Belgium have been trying to discourage class discrimination, and this has resulted to a sort of taboo for all discussions about social classes.

This was part of a general trend of liberalism and even laissez-faire towar younger generations from the 1970's onwards. Parents have been encouraging their children to marry anybody they love regardless of their class (resulting in more divorces), to study anything they like at school/university regardless of market opportunities (that's why there are so many unemployed university graduates in France and Belgium)...
Parents say that they want their children's happiness by letting them do whatever they want, but the truth is that it is easier for them not to take responsibility in telling them what to do, and let the children learn from their own experiences and failures. This is also why society has become more individualistic, but also why so many young people have lost their landmarks and waste so much time trying to figure what they want to do with their lives. This is the result of a too liberal society, where values inherited from the past and from religion have disappeared for new personalised values. But there are things that do not change, even in a religion-free and liberal society : social classes.

I understand the political will to "reconciliate" classes, but this can only be done by improving education for everyone at home and at school. Because there will always be big disparities in education, class differences will continue to exist, whether people wish it or not. It is not by refraining to talk about class differences and allowing one's children to marry "anyboby" that society will be better off. Understand class differences is, on the contrary, the key to prevent class conflicts, in the same way that learning about other religions may help understand the way others think.

Thanks for pointing this out, this helps me understand French society more. Yes I have heard numerous real stories of French people's marital problems.

Chinese societies have far less divorces; maybe it is because the Chinese stick to their own social class for marriages.

 

[Minty]

In general, if the parents are wealthy and well educated, the children will be raised with a good education and will be used to a more refined way of life, with better manners than average, speaking with a posher accent, and having tastes and values that reflect these higher standards. This is all the truer if the children went to a school with people from the same social level as theirs, so as not to corrupt their manners, language and tastes.

Yes that is true; my mother doesn't like me talking or making friends with people that come from social classes lower than mine. She thinks it is bad influence.

She is not satisfied with the school that we first went to and she swoop us into expensive private schools when she could afford it.

The Australian immigration cost us a great deal of money hence we couldn't afford to live in high class suburbs in Australia in the commencement. My mother changed my first high school the second year after she met my friend and had visited my first high school.

The parents, however, may not have such bourgeois way of speaking or manners, even if they are doctors or lawyers, if they were born into a lower social class. I have personally noticed that very, very few people jump more than 1 level of the 4 main social classes (upper, upper-middle, middle, lower) in their lifetime. If you are born in a middle class milieu, you could raise yourself to upper-middle class or fall to lower class, but rarely I have seen a person from a lower class milieu becoming upper-middle class, or someone from a middle class milieu becoming upper class (the other way round is easier though). In the most extreme cases, such a change normally takes place over 2 generations.

Yes for the lower class to rise to upper is very hard, it is much easier to fall down.

My great grand father was an official in the end of the Qing dynasty, when the dynasty fell, and later the Japanese invasion, the family lost land, status and tones of wealth. My grandfather had a hard time growing up in the Second World War.

To have lost so many things that was once his, he still growls and complains about it today.

During the era of the Cultural Revolution, the communists sent people to spy and to blackmail and to threaten the literate and the people who once hold power due to their inheritance (in China and in Taiwan). Mao hated the people in the upper class as he was born in the lower class; he blamed the upper-class for the miseries of the lower class Chinese during the Japanese invasion.

Do you mean farmer (landowner) or peasant (just working the land) ? Farmers are a special cases in social classes; I know some that are typically lower class, others that are middle class, and a few that are nearly upper-middle class.

My father's father was a peasant; he was very, very poor. At a young age my father understood that if he wanted a better life in the future he had to study hard in order to become a professional. He did, he got a scholarship to study medicine and he graduated from medicine school.

He is a doctor and its true his children, us have a much better life than him. This has to do with social class and family backgrounds.

 

[Maciamo]

I didn't say they don't exist, I say the French don't think they exist and they don't pay a lot of attention to social class, like the Americans.

But don't you ever hear the term bourgeois (the only French term for upper-middle class) or class moyenne (middle class), classe ouvrière (working class) or even élite or artistocartie (both part of the upper class) in France ? French language doesn't have words like "upper" or "lower" to describe classes, but other terms that correspond to the exact same thing. We could go further and say that words like délinquent, or even people from the banlieues sensibles (sensitive suburbs, referring to poor immigrant suburbs) are near synonymous for lower class in French. People don't speak much of "proletariat" anymore, because industrial times have past, and it doesn't make much sense nowadays. But if you are careful about the language (given that you are fluent in French), you will notice that there are in fact many words charged with class insinuations, although the word "class" is not as common as in English.

French people will prefer to a school, neighbourhood or dressing style as "bourgeois" or "populaire" (another understament for "lower class") than call them upper-middle or lower class (anyway there is no such word in French, as I said).

 

[gaijinalways]

Originally Posted by Minty
I didn't say they don't exist, I say the French don't think they exist and they don't pay a lot of attention to social class, like the Americans.

Hmm, sounds odd. Most of my friends don't, though I am not very class conscious. I see it a lot here in Japan, even though some still believe in the myth of 'one class' (though how class is expressed here is sometimes more likley to be through luxary brand and name dropping, not family history). But than again how many people are related to a real samurai?

 

[Maciamo]

But than again how many people are related to a real samurai?

The samurai were not a social class, they were a caste. The difference is that one can never change caste, and most often cannot marry outside their caste. There were 5 castes in the Edo period (1600-1867) in Japan, just like in India but in a different order :

- Samurai (warriors)
- Farmers
- Artisans
- Merchants
- Untouchables (eta)

The eta were renamed burakumin, and people with eta ancestry are still discriminated against in Japan (although it is illegal).

 

[Minty]

Hmm, sounds odd. Most of my firends don't, though I am not very class conscious.

Why does it sound odd? Who are most of your friends? Americans? Japanese?

 

[Minty]

But don't you ever hear the term bourgeois (the only French term for upper-middle class) or class moyenne (middle class), classe ouvrière (working class) or even élite or artistocartie (both part of the upper class) in France ? French language doesn't have words like "upper" or "lower" to describe classes, but other terms that correspond to the exact same thing. We could go further and say that words like délinquent, or even people from the banlieues sensibles (sensitive suburbs, referring to poor immigrant suburbs) are near synonymous for lower class in French. People don't speak much of "proletariat" anymore, because industrial times have past, and it doesn't make much sense nowadays. But if you are careful about the language (given that you are fluent in French), you will notice that there are in fact many words charged with class insinuations, although the word "class" is not as common as in English.
French people will prefer to a school, neighbourhood or dressing style as "bourgeois" or "populaire" (another understament for "lower class") than call them upper-middle or lower class (anyway there is no such word in French, as I said).

Well I have heard of terms like bourgeois, proletariat...

This is my general impression of the French, they tend to think their society is not very stratified, they often say France is a republic; everybody has right to free education, free healthcare.

 

[Maciamo]

Well I have heard of terms like bourgeois, proletariat...
This is my general impression of the French, they tend to think their society is not very stratified, they often say France is a republic; everybody has right to free education, free healthcare.

You still don't get it, do you ? Republic has nothing to do with social classes. As I explained earlier, the least stratified countries in the world are monarchies (Scandinavian countries, Netherlands, Japan...), while some of the most startified countries are republics (India, USA, France, Russia, most African and South American countries...).

If you go back to the power distance concept (lined above), we can get an idea of which countries accept the most big gaps between the bottom and top of society. It doesn't mean that such societies are the most stratified. Conversely, a country with low power distance could be very stratified, but would risk a revolution. If you check the statitics by country, you will see that Malaysia is ranked as the country with the highest power distance in the world, so the one where people at the bottom of society accept and expect the most that power is distributed unequally. Germanic countries and Israel are those that expect the most egalitarian systems. We know that it works well in high-taxes high-distribution countries like in Scandinavia, but poorly in ultra-liberal English-speaking countries (USA and Australia on top). We see that India has a high score (77), which mean that it is part of the culture to accept social inequalities, which is true. But France also ranks quite high (68, the highest in Europe), which means that the French accept and expect society to be unequal, despite all the egalitarian values of the French Revolution (let us not forget that France got 2 monarchies and 2 empires after the French Revolution, with restoration of the aristocracy and priviledges).