Leasure Class?

xtisme: Well, as I pointed out above, no class analysis, no matter how sophisticated, can be hard-and-fast. Not in the U.S., anyway. There will always be a certain number of people on the fringe between two classes, who might be assigned to one class or the other. You might be in the white overclass, the Hispanic overclass, or the middle class. You probably won’t know for certain until you see where your children end up.

What does the white overclass DO? For one thing, while it does not, as a class, rule the country – a class is not an organization – it does produce the people who rule the country, the “institutional elite.” Here is another excerpt from TNAN, pp. 142-143, which I omitted from my earlier post in the interest of (hah!) brevity:
. . . Indeed, we cannot talk intelligently about class unless we make a distinction between a social class and a mere institutional elite. Those who talk about “the political class” or, with C. Wright Mills, about “the power elite,” are confusing two very different things. Every modern society, even the most perfectly egalitarian, will have an institutional elite – top civilian politicians, military officers, judges, diplomats, financial and industrial executives, publishers, editors and leading intellectuals, clerical leaders, and so on. The subject of class is raised only when you examine the social origins of the particular individuals who hold office in the institutional elite or elites. Learning the organization of judicial offices in a country tells you nothing about class. However, if you find out that most of the judges tend to come from old-money families in a particular region of that country, and that most attended one of half a dozen schools, then you have learned something important about that country’s class system.

The United States at the end of the twentieth century has both an institutional elite and a dominant social class. The institutional elite is composed of upper-level officials in the federal and state governments, plus executives and professionals in the concentrated private sector and foundation and university executives (low-level government officials and small business owners are not part of the institutional elite). Almost all of the members of the American institutional elite also happen to be members of a single social class: the white overclass. To put it another way, the labor pool from which most elite positions are filled is the white overclass. The overlap is not complete. Though most members of the institutional elite belong to the white overclass, most members of the white overclass are not part of the institutional elite (since the overclass greatly outnumbers the elite); and – though this is uncommon – a person can become a high-ranking politician, military officer, judge, CEO, foundation president, or university president in the United States without having been born into the white overclass. It is possible to imagine a United States in which most members of the institutional elite did not have similar class origins. But that is not the country in which we live.
Now, as you pointed out, the overclass produces political liberals as well as conservatives. In another of his books,
Up From Conservatism, which I don’t have in front of me right now, Michael Lind show how the liberalism of the overclass is very different from any political viewpoint of the working class.

And, yes, the American white overclass controls the means of production, in three obvious
ways:

  1. All our major corporations (which directly own and control most productive property, including, nowadays, agricultural as well as industrial property) are run by overclass executives; in particular, the CEOs and boards of directors are almost certain to be of overclass origin.

  2. All our major corporations are, technically, owned by their stockholders, and most of that stock is in the hands of overclass investors.

  3. Corporate control of the means of production is to some degree mitigated by the superior power of the government, but the overclass controls that too, as explained above.

Revolution eventually!

OK, so what schools do the overclass members go to. I’m guessing the guys go to Harvard, Yale, Princeton and maybe a coupla others, because it’s kind of amazing how often people who land big-money jobs or get promoted as bestselling writers, etc., just happen to have gone there. I’m guessing that Radcliffe, Bryn Mawr, Brown and the rest of the Seven Sisters.

That’s why I kinda tend to buy into the overclass theory. I used to think that class was irrelevant to most Americans, but nowadays I’m inclined to think it has a lot to do with how likely you are to succeed in life – what jobs you get offered, what opportunities you obtain. I still think you can get ahead on merit, but a guy born into the wrong class is gonna need a hell of a lot more merit than one who is.

I suppose the thing gthat put the hammer on the nail was listening to NPR and hearing a story of a young writer who had to sit with a fatuous old editor of a major east coast paper saying, “It’s amazig how often the best people really are the best people!”

Yes and no. If you want to work at a top investment bank or consulting firm like Goldman Sachs or McKinsey, it helps to graduate from a top-10 business school. Then again, with the I-banks and consulting firms laying everyone off, nothing is guaranteed. And even if you aren’t laid off, you may still not be able to work 100 hour weeks or 100% travel long enough to advance above high-paid white collar slave to the “overclass” (ie MD or Partner)

What you are seeing is an institutional class system. Certain schools developed a reputation for excellence so the top companies tend to hire there. Since those schools offer access to the top jobs, the attract more students and can select the best of the bunch. Graduate in the top of your class and you can land a good job. Good jobs tend to lead to better jobs and so on.

This is not necessarily a bad thing. After all, would you rather have your most talented and educated as the leaders of your governments, corporations and financial institutions or some fuck-o who went to community college cause he spent his HS days stoned?
The problem is that the “class” system is reinforced in a number of ways that makes it dificult to move upward from once class to another. One is simple knowledge. Most people have no idea that it takes more than just study hard/get a good job to become anything more than just a good cog in someone elses machine.

Another, of course, is the family you are built into. If you are born into a family that can afford to send you to college or subsidize your lifestyle or crackpot business plan, you certainly have an advantage over some kid who has to work 3 jobs to pay his tuition.

Thanks BrainGlutton…given me a lot to think about. I’ll check out the books and see if it changes my view on things.

One final though from me on this. No doubt that the social status of your birth (re: Race, financial strata, possibly religious affiliation) helps quite a bit. I don’t see how it could be any other way, given that if YOU have money, you are certainly going to make sure your children enjoy the benifits of it. And no doubt that it also paves the way to a political ruling class (i.e. members of our political orders, reguardless of which party, are MOSTLY drawn from the wealthy). But its definitely not a ridgid system…ANYONE, reguardless of their birth status, can rise to the highest levels (from what I understand, the second anti-christ Nixon wasn’t particularly rich, nor does he LOOK like the standard WASP, though I might be wrong about that…and I think Bill Gates, the first anti-christ dropped out of college and didn’t come from a particulary wealthy family) through luck, skill and determination. There are plenty of examples (though mine might be bad…my best example is my dad, but it would be meanless to ya’ll).

Being wealthy is not NECESSARILY a crime or evil. Being poor is not NECESSARILY noble. Many people are wealthy because they EARNED it…and many people are poor because they EARNED that. And maybe there IS a small class of useless wasters at the top spectrum (ok, no maybe there…there ARE such people, no doubt)…a leisure class. But I still feel that the majority of people considered ‘wealthy’ WORK for it, and many of them work harder than the average ‘working man’ thinks they do.

-XT

actually, you are wrong, xtisme.

I have read sources that indicate that the vast majority of people who are wealthy inherited their wealth, they didn’t build their fortune from scratch.

I have also read that there’s actually very little migration from the (economic) middle class to the (economic) upper class (or vice versa). there is a large amount of migration between the lower middle class and the upper lower class, in both directions. But it’s not permanent, it’s more a matter of “churning” as the fortunes of individuals and families are changed by the absence or prescence of a good-paying job.

I realize that these assertions need cites to back 'em up and if anybody wants to challenge them I’ll see if I can dig 'em up.

However, as for the “anybody can succeed in America” meme, you may be interested to know that every year the Roman Emperor used to free a number of slaves. The idea was to keep the slaves content by giving them the feeling that “anybody, even a slave, can become a citizen of Rome.” Of course, that was not reality for the vast majority of Roman slaves. I’m hoping you see the parallels here.

I would be interested in seeing those statistics.

I would also be interested in seeing statistics on what % of CEOs are self made men like Bill Gates or Michael Dell and the income bracket these people were born into if such stats exist.
When we say “anyone CAN succeed in America” that does not mean that everyone WILL succeed. Obviously not everyone can be a CEO. What stops most people from entering the ranks of the super wealthy?
-First of all, a lot of people just don’t want to. Not everyone wants to be a banker or lawyer or manage a division.
-A lot of people are just not that smart. How many people are in the top 1% academically? It’s pretty hard to get into Harvard Law or Wharton or get a top job in the Fortune 500 as a C student.
-It’s not that easy coming up with a good idea for a business.
-Bad luck - people get laid off, divorced, injured, whatever.
-Working your entire life to amass wealth sucks - It’s great to be born wealthy. For the rest of us, to acquire that kind of wealth means an entire lifetime of working to be the best of the best - studying, working 100 hour weeks, weekends, etc. All to give it all to your stupid spoiled kids who will probably blow it all on coke and expensive cars.

Jack Welch - GE -
BS Chemical Engineering, UMASS
M.S. and Ph.D degrees in chemical engineering, University of Illinois

Lee Iaccoca - Chrysler - Son of Italian imigrants,
graduated Lehigh University
Went to Princeton on a Fellowship

Bill Gates - Microsoft - Born into a typical upper-middle class family (dad was a lawyer, mom was a schoolteacher)
dropped out of Harvard

Those are just three that I pulled off the top of my head. They all went to decent schools but hardly what I would call elite. With the exception of Gates who never finished.