Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Is it worth arguing politics with middle-class people?

Manter said:
I was going to say something similar. I am amazed OP managed to find a group of people who weren't completely supportive of the doctors tbh.
Click to expand...

You'd think.

But the anti-public sector message has been pretty pervasive, at least round here.
 
sihhi said:
If you are talking about actual middle-class settled people, in 99% of cases, nothing.
They will agree that other people (Conservatives, Health Secretary etc) are callous. And that's that, their own multiple house ownership will never register.
Click to expand...
Ah don't we just love tired old cliches.

The people I've met who own multiple houses have mainly been working class.

Specifically builders, plumbers, electricians and carpenters.

I've met the occasional middle class civil servant who had a second home to rent but no more than that.
 
Interesting question to me as i've been researching the long standing historical near social 'apartheid' of this country (clearly under some strain from mass university education and soft-proleratianistion of many of the traditionally m/c jobs - sorry, professions). the classic case as put by E.P Thompson was that the new working class in this country in the late 18th/early 19th century moved to the city and apart from working for them had little or no social interaction with those 'above them' they formed almost separate species unlike in say france where there was, due to the slow pace of urbanisation and lots of families actually owning the land they worked and a social mix was the norm. The only really comparable place was Germany pre-ww1. Here, all living in the same places, working at the same places, drinking in the same pubs, following the same team etc developed a gap that only individuals could or would want to cross - rather than large groups of people as a whole (that didn't really happen to any extent until the effects of the post-war rebuilding kicked in in the late 50s/early 60s).

The upshot, for this thread being, that there remains a stubborn residue of them lot over they're they're different, they don't have the same interests as me/us and that is not going away anytime soon, based as the original ideas/feelings were in a long lasting and life-shaping material circumstances and relations. And, it should go without saying, that this also impacted (and will still do) on the way traditional m/c also view the trad w/c and how their interests intersect/compete etc with that of what they see as theirs.
 
butchersapron said:
Interesting question to me as i've been researching the long standing historical near social 'apartheid' of this country (clearly under some strain from mass university education and soft-proleratianistion of many of the traditionally m/c jobs - sorry, professions). the classic case as put by E.P Thompson was that the new working class in this country in the late 18th/early 19th century moved to the city and apart from working for them had little or no social interaction with those 'above them' they formed almost separate species unlike in say france where there was, due to the slow pace of urbanisation and lots of families actually owning the land they worked and a social mix was the norm. The only really comparable place was Germany pre-ww1. Here, all living in the same places, working at the same places, drinking in the same pubs, following the same team etc developed a gap that only individuals could or would want to cross - rather than large groups of people as a whole (that didn't really happen to any extent until the effects of the post-war rebuilding kicked in in the late 50s/early 60s).

The upshot, for this thread being, that there remains a stubborn residue of them lot over they're they're different, they don't have the same interests as me/us and that is not going away anytime soon, based as the original ideas/feelings were in a long lasting and life-shaping material circumstances. And, it should go without saying, that this also impacted (and will still do) on the way traditional m/c also view the trad w/c and how their interests intersect/compete etc with that of what they see as theirs.
Click to expand...
Did you see that piece about the railways in the current LRB? One interesting point consistent with your post is that there was a lot of resistance to ending 1st 2nd and 3rd class carriages on trains (and that there had been strong resistance to even providing proper seating or safety in third class). And the clerks who were expected to keep clean for the office were presumed to not want to rub shoulders with the navvies etc.
 
Idris2002 said:
Did you see that piece about the railways in the current LRB? One interesting point consistent with your post is that there was a lot of resistance to ending 1st 2nd and 3rd class carriages on trains (and that there had been strong resistance to even providing proper seating or safety in third class). And the clerks who were expected to keep clean for the office were presumed to not want to rub shoulders with the navvies etc.
Click to expand...
Got a copy, not read yet though. Will read that piece first then.
 
Gromit said:
Ah don't we just love tired old cliches.

The people I've met who own multiple houses have mainly been working class.

Specifically builders, plumbers, electricians and carpenters.

I've met the occasional middle class civil servant who had a second home to rent but no more than that.
Click to expand...

I know a number of people with multiple properties. All archetypical middle class. Junior to middle management types. Using mummy and daddy's money to grab as many BTLs as they can.

I also know retired m/c people with multiple properties.
 
Last edited:
chilango said:
I know a number of people with multiple properties. All archetypical middle class. Junior to middle management types. Using mummy and daddy's money to grab as many BTLs as they can.
Click to expand...
yes. i thought it would be "a number", presumably a whole number, a positive whole number, and not an irrational number like pi. could you be more specific about this number?
 
I think arguing with people with different views is absolutely essential for anyone who genuinely wants to test their own views.

Even if you don't change any minds in one discussion, the holes it might reveal in your knowledge or arguments might help you change some minds the next time round.
 
teuchter said:
I think arguing with people with different views is absolutely essential for anyone who genuinely wants to test their own views.

Even if you don't change any minds in one discussion, the holes it might reveal in your knowledge or arguments might help you change some minds the next time round.
Click to expand...
yes i said that above.
 
Idris2002 said:
Did you see that piece about the railways in the current LRB? One interesting point consistent with your post is that there was a lot of resistance to ending 1st 2nd and 3rd class carriages on trains (and that there had been strong resistance to even providing proper seating or safety in third class). And the clerks who were expected to keep clean for the office were presumed to not want to rub shoulders with the navvies etc.
Click to expand...
It's a sad fact of human existence in the so called modern civilised world that people judge happiness not by how much they have but by how much more they have than others.

Most people don't buy 1st class because they want comfort and are prepared to pay extra for it. No they buy it to confirm to themselves that they are somehow better as they have better.
Some people buy it just to buy that illusion briefly.

Me personally. I'm tall so I need legroom. I don't give a fuck about anything else and can feel the disapproving stares when I sit there in my scruffy jeans and tshirt. Not that I give a fuck what they or anyone else thinks about me (if you hadn't worked that out about me by now).
 
I think the idea that progressive social change - which, by definition, requires the direct participation or consent of the broad mass of people - can come about by an aggregation of individual victories in debate or argument until 51% agree, is idealist SPGB style nonsense. So it that sense, not it's not 'worth it'. That sort of social change (or challenge) comes about by mass reflection on material circumstances, how they cam about and how to change them and linking up together to do just that. Think about the anti-poll tax campaign(s) for example. That didn't kick off by a lot of people having their minds changed.

In terms of is it 'worth it' because you enjoy it, because you genuinely have something you either want to share or challenge, because it's a laugh and a way to learn things about people and situations - absolutely.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Smokeandsteam
Building Independent Working Class Politics
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
hitmouse
hitmouse
magneze
UK is worst country in Europe for drug prices - or is it?
Replies
1
Views
174
magneze
magneze
G
31 May 2025: Car 'Collides' With Four People in De Montfort Street, Leicester
Replies
23
Views
1K
GarveyLives
G
weltweit
Bionic Eye Implant allows vision in blind people ..
Replies
3
Views
91
Coffeecup
C
platinumsage
Civil service interns must be working class from next year
2
Replies
58
Views
1K
GarveyLives
G
Back
Top Bottom