5 ms·

We love to talk about how being born a certain gender or a certain race shouldn't hold you back from achieving anything you want in America. But what if you are

We love to talk about how being born a certain gender or a certain race shouldn't hold you back from achieving anything you want in America. But what if you are unlucky enough to be born into a poor family, or in a backwoods, downtrodden region of the country? My experience aligns with the author's. In movies and feel-good stories shared on social media, we romantically idolize the humble rich person, who came from nothing yet somehow stays "true to their roots". And that is a lovely, inspiring mindset necessary to keep people motivated...in theory. In practice, in order to get ahead in life and to cross class boundaries, you will have to acknowledge that aspects of your upbringing and former way of life are "backwards". You'll have to reconcile that the rich will scorn you and think of your home as a "shithole", and that you "weren't supposed to" make it to the top. You'll have to see things in a new light, and as the author notes, your social life and identity will take a hit (e.g. old friends who won't come to your wedding, or dating prospects who are afraid of being associated with lower classes). There is a moral failing in our country where the pursuit of money is seen as the objective optimal thing to do. But it's very reasonable to look at how money changes people, and to turn away from such a lifestyle in disgust.

Helmet 9y ago
> There is a moral failing in our country where the pursuit of money is seen as the objective optimal thing to do. But it's very reasonable to look at how money changes people, and to turn away from such a lifestyle in disgust. It's also very easy and PC to venerate the poor out of some misguided sense of pity or moral absolutism. One could look at poor communities, and, as you said "turn away from such a lifestyle in disgust" and choose enrich themselves. I'm also not entirely, or even in the least bit, convinced that our society, institutions, social structures, and general well-being would be better off WITHOUT class distinctions. Going deeper, they seem to me to be an essential component of civilization, one of the many necessary "glues" of social order. edit: This site is slowly turning into Reddit - contrarian opinions need not apply. Instead of down-votes, why not rebut what I said? It's not like the matter is settled, and the last couple times the populous tried to "abolish" social classes, mass terror followed.
- balthasar 9y ago
  Its very difficult to convince people who are immersed in a certain way of living and a certain social order that there exists alternatives.
  - Helmet 9y ago
    Class distinction and hierarchy are precisely the sort of social mechanisms that convince people that there exists alternatives to certain modes of living (class aspiration).
    - balthasar 9y ago
      What they are going to create a new class? Move up to the next one? Class mobility is a fallacy that was invented to support the hierarchy. Its not an alternative system in any sense.
      - Helmet 9y ago
        > Move up to the next one? Yes > Class mobility is a fallacy This is patently false. Social mobility is entirely possible, although it has gotten harder since the 1980's, but that wasn't your claim. > that was invented to support the hierarchy The hierarchy doesn't need "support". Class and social hierarchy has been observed in every culture since time immemorial. The radical and unfounded claim is the notion that we can "remove" it in any meaningful sense. > Its not an alternative system in any sense. Moving into a new social class impacts your life in every conceivable way, from the way you speak, dress, behave, to the job you perform. On an individual level, it absolutely would resemble "systemic" changes to both one's material and immaterial life.
        balthasar 9y ago
        Exactly "systemic" changes. Changes relating to the system you are in.
- ikeyany 9y ago
sloppycee 9y ago
> ... look at how money changes people ... I think the point of the article is that it's not that money changes people, but rather that change begets money; they are interrelated at least.

Helmet 9y ago

> There is a moral failing in our country where the pursuit of money is seen as the objective optimal thing to do. But it's very reasonable to look at how money changes people, and to turn away from such a lifestyle in disgust. It's also very easy and PC to venerate the poor out of some misguided sense of pity or moral absolutism. One could look at poor communities, and, as you said "turn away from such a lifestyle in disgust" and choose enrich themselves. I'm also not entirely, or even in the least bit, convinced that our society, institutions, social structures, and general well-being would be better off WITHOUT class distinctions. Going deeper, they seem to me to be an essential component of civilization, one of the many necessary "glues" of social order. edit: This site is slowly turning into Reddit - contrarian opinions need not apply. Instead of down-votes, why not rebut what I said? It's not like the matter is settled, and the last couple times the populous tried to "abolish" social classes, mass terror followed.

balthasar 9y ago
Its very difficult to convince people who are immersed in a certain way of living and a certain social order that there exists alternatives.
- Helmet 9y ago
  Class distinction and hierarchy are precisely the sort of social mechanisms that convince people that there exists alternatives to certain modes of living (class aspiration).
  - balthasar 9y ago
    What they are going to create a new class? Move up to the next one? Class mobility is a fallacy that was invented to support the hierarchy. Its not an alternative system in any sense.
    - Helmet 9y ago
      > Move up to the next one? Yes > Class mobility is a fallacy This is patently false. Social mobility is entirely possible, although it has gotten harder since the 1980's, but that wasn't your claim. > that was invented to support the hierarchy The hierarchy doesn't need "support". Class and social hierarchy has been observed in every culture since time immemorial. The radical and unfounded claim is the notion that we can "remove" it in any meaningful sense. > Its not an alternative system in any sense. Moving into a new social class impacts your life in every conceivable way, from the way you speak, dress, behave, to the job you perform. On an individual level, it absolutely would resemble "systemic" changes to both one's material and immaterial life.
      - balthasar 9y ago
        Exactly "systemic" changes. Changes relating to the system you are in.
ikeyany 9y ago

sloppycee 9y ago

> ... look at how money changes people ... I think the point of the article is that it's not that money changes people, but rather that change begets money; they are interrelated at least.