6 ms·

I'm not sure I agree. In the UK, the lower middle class are (to generalise) materially well-off; they own their own homes, they have a couple of cars, they have

I'm not sure I agree. In the UK, the lower middle class are (to generalise) materially well-off; they own their own homes, they have a couple of cars, they have large televisions, one partner does not have to work, etc. And through pure boredom/decadence, they were radicalised through years of negative messaging from the populist press into 'caring' about things like Brexit, immigration, welfare claimants, etc. These are people that have most of their needs met and are comfortable, yet their emotional buttons were pushed over the course of years into making them foam at the mouth about things they largely don't fully grasp and that definitely don't have an impact on their lives.

roenxi 5y ago
Hasn't the UK's energy availability basically collapsed? I keep an eye on the basic stats [0] and it looked like the situation was pretty grim leading up to Brexit. Someone is really hurting. Either production is collapsing and people are losing good jobs, or it is directly going to result in household pain. I suppose it would surprise me if 20% of a country's electricity can disappear, almost half its primary energy production is gone, the population grows by 10% and everyone is cheerful. It looks like a situation ripe for rage, tension and people asking angry questions. This is basically the pigeonhole principle at work. If energy availability is going down and population is rising, someone is going to be developing some profoundly anti-migrant views. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_the_United_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_the_United_Kingdom
- pfdietz 5y ago
  The numbers look like a combination of increased import of electricity and move away from lower efficiency thermal cycles for electricity production (primary energy use is the thermal energy before going through the heat engine; replacement of coal and nuclear with gas and wind would reduce primary energy use even if electricity production were unchanged.)
- cranekam 5y ago
  Can you explain what "energy availability" means in this context? My family lives in the UK and the lights work and the gad flows. Prices increase over time (above inflation, IIRC) but it still works, so I assume you're referring to some other meaning I don't yet know about.
  - roenxi 5y ago
    The amount of energy is lower - the UK is producing much less, electricity use has declined and (although it isn't strictly certain) that is suggestive evidence that if you tallied up all the Joules consumed in the UK then there are less of them in 2016 than 2010. If there are less Joules and more people, some people must - by mathematical necessity - be consuming less of them. If your family can still afford to consume the same amount then maybe someone else on the margins is really being pushed. That is a pretty decent reason for why a large number of people might be getting desperate for political change. It is a stronger explanation than some variant of the more common "maybe they are just really confused and/or hateful and/or unexpectedly stupid". People don't read economic stats but they'll notice if 20% of their electricity goes away.
    - nicoburns 5y ago
      I live in the UK, and I don't think energy has anything to do with it. We're producing less electricity because we're consuming less electrcity, which is mostly due to more energy efficient appliances and decreasing industrial usage isn't impacting lifestyles. If you want to point to something, I'd look towards massively inflated house prices (almost 10x over 30 years in some places), and stagnating real wages.
      - roenxi 5y ago
        > ...which is mostly due to more energy efficient appliances and decreasing industrial usage isn't impacting lifestyles. For energy efficiency to cover the change + population growth with no winding back of lifestyles it would need to be something like a 30% increase in efficiency over 10 years, affecting all electrical devices in the country. There is reason to be sceptical that it is a major factor here. Add to that there is an argument/observation (Jevons's Paradox) that increasing efficiency of using a commodity generally doesn't lead to reduced usage. If it made sense to procure X commodity when it generated Y, it makes it even more sensibly to procure X when it gets you (Y+something). As for decreasing industrial use ... the default position when a country jettisons its industry is "gee, that might reasonable upset a lot of people and/or cause social problems!". The changes are rather large. Deindustrialising might foreseeable lead to such things as stagnating real wages, as the country can't produce as many goods, or massively inflated house prices as it becomes more difficult to secure useful work/build new houses.
barbarbar 5y ago
The last part of this comment is very well written. Actually the whole comment is. Having said that there are a lot of EU that is... Well crazy but what was before was not really good either.
peteretep 5y ago
> the lower middle class are (to generalise) materially well-off ... they have large televisions ... through pure boredom/decadence they were radicalised ... about things they largely don't fully grasp 8/10 top parody comment. You could have strengthened it by suggesting they turn to brioche if they don't have enough bread to eat though.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 5y ago
  Please address parent's post in good faith. The point he was not outlandish or imponderable.
  - nindalf 5y ago
    I agree with the parent's post FWIW. However, there is a strong tendency in mainstream thought to have great deference to "the People", however you define it. The voice of the People is the voice of God, in fact. So for a person to claim that well off people turned to radical thought out of boredom and ignorance might be correct, but would be considered not just outlandish, as you put it, but outright heresy. It's not just the UK. It's the US and every other place. Trump wins 46% of the popular vote in 2016 and suddenly there's a deluge of think pieces about how people are hurting and what not. Yeah maybe. But there's a lot of folks out there who love voting for a guy who "triggers libs" and normalizes pussy grabbing. And we're not allowed to say this, because again, it's heresy in a democracy to imply that a large segment of voters could be ignorant or stupid or racist. Another example, this time with vaccines. One person decides not to get a life saving vaccine because he was duped by misinformation online - he's an idiot. 30% of the population swallow the same bullshit - they have valid concerns that we need to empathise with and assuage. If they choose not to get vaccinated, we have to accept their choice. We shouldn't require vaccine passports because it would hurt their feelings and their ability to transmit diseases to their fellow citizens.
    - A4ET8a8uTh0 5y ago
      You touched on a lot of important things and I will try to respond to all of them without distracting myself. I posit to you that 'people hurting and what not' are not merely think pieces ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillbilly_Elegy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillbilly_Elegy ). I remember driving through PA months before Trump's election and recall seeing some of the sadder signs you can read including "Save us Trump". It is not "triggering the libs"; it is genuine despair of no options other than triggering the libs. It is important to understand where it comes from, if one is to have a hope to counter it in any meaningful way. Just using that slogan is a mental shortcut that undermines our discourse. I do not see that understanding. What I see is more targeted messaged intended to inflame pre-existing passions. I do not see discussion. I see bumper stickers. As for democracy, there is an argument to be made that it relies on educated and engaged populace. I am not the biggest fan, because US has neither and a lot of ways to manipulate public opinion are well understood now. And yet, it is still a better option than benevolent dictator, monarchy or some sort of theocracy. Now, we can quibble over whether US is a democracy, which in itself is a discussion for a couple of pages. I do think you have a point with vaccines, but I want you to consider the question of choice, mandates and so on in regards to government imposing choices upon you. What is the lesser evil here?
joshuahughes 5y ago
"In the UK, the lower middle class are (to generalise) materially well-off; they own their own homes, they have a couple of cars, they have large televisions, one partner does not have to work, etc." I'm glad you added "(to generalise)" in there, because I'd class myself as 'lower middle' and most of my family/friends in a similar bracket absolutely cannot function without both partners working, and a majority are renting rather than buying their home. I'd argue that what you've described is only true of those OLDER lower middle class folks (like my parents) who struck it lucky before the housing market lost its mind. The only reason I personally fit into your description (well, I only have one car) is that I was lucky to find my way into the software industry which pays a heck of a lot better than most...
laurent92 5y ago
The average life in UK is to be a drunkard with bad teeth. Don’t take it bad, I love such friends and you may face difficulties with life, but while some find it poetic and party-prone, what does it tell about the country’s care of its citizen? Which other nation has a higher quantity of middle classes who drink themselves to near-death experience every second evening? What does it mean when the middleclass experience is to use pills at every high-school party since 1980? No matter how you look at it, you cannot possibly tell me that the UK-born Englishman has been well taken care of. Especially when the representative TV show of the country is Top Gear, which, besides being awesome and fun to watch, is also stuck in the pollution and selfish age (apart from James May, who timidly looks to the electric future), and shows those drunkards-with-bad-teeth are not at all the lowerclasses or the unlucky, but the normal life up to the top of the society. The crib of Rock’n’roll is now a nation that is desperate for illusions right from the bottom to the top.
- nradov 5y ago
  You're exaggerating. The UK isn't even in the top 10 for alcohol consumption. https://www.alcohol.org/guides/global-drinking-demographics/ https://www.alcohol.org/guides/global-drinking-demographics/
  - ModernMech 5y ago
    It's not top 10, but at 10.4 liters consumed per capita it looks like it might be number 11. Not exactly not a problem.
carschno 5y ago
We have seen an enormous disintegration of social stability in many European countries, if not most. Those parts of the middle class that have not been affected by materially are right to fear they will be. This economic development has been a consequence of the politics of the past decades which have been dominated by austerity, general redistribution of wealth towards the top, and accompanying measures against democratic structures that can include free press, independent justice, marginalization of workers unions etc. Especially more radical parties of that sort like Orban have driven these classical liberal economic developments; mind the hypocrisy in their "illiberalism" claims. Every other topic that has emotional potential can serve as a scapegoat for distraction ("we have to fight the common enemy first, then we can care about the poor"): immigrants, the EU, Jewish/Marxist conspiracies, homosexuals etc. It does not _necessarily_ mean that there are no problems related to other topics (e.g. EU bureaucracy etc.), but that is hardly relevant in these cases. You see this playbook in many countries inside and outside of Europe (e.g. Brazil, USA, UK, Russia, Poland, Slovenia, Turkey, ...).

roenxi 5y ago

Hasn't the UK's energy availability basically collapsed? I keep an eye on the basic stats [0] and it looked like the situation was pretty grim leading up to Brexit. Someone is really hurting. Either production is collapsing and people are losing good jobs, or it is directly going to result in household pain. I suppose it would surprise me if 20% of a country's electricity can disappear, almost half its primary energy production is gone, the population grows by 10% and everyone is cheerful. It looks like a situation ripe for rage, tension and people asking angry questions. This is basically the pigeonhole principle at work. If energy availability is going down and population is rising, someone is going to be developing some profoundly anti-migrant views. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_the_United_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_the_United_Kingdom

pfdietz 5y ago
The numbers look like a combination of increased import of electricity and move away from lower efficiency thermal cycles for electricity production (primary energy use is the thermal energy before going through the heat engine; replacement of coal and nuclear with gas and wind would reduce primary energy use even if electricity production were unchanged.)
cranekam 5y ago
Can you explain what "energy availability" means in this context? My family lives in the UK and the lights work and the gad flows. Prices increase over time (above inflation, IIRC) but it still works, so I assume you're referring to some other meaning I don't yet know about.
- roenxi 5y ago
  The amount of energy is lower - the UK is producing much less, electricity use has declined and (although it isn't strictly certain) that is suggestive evidence that if you tallied up all the Joules consumed in the UK then there are less of them in 2016 than 2010. If there are less Joules and more people, some people must - by mathematical necessity - be consuming less of them. If your family can still afford to consume the same amount then maybe someone else on the margins is really being pushed. That is a pretty decent reason for why a large number of people might be getting desperate for political change. It is a stronger explanation than some variant of the more common "maybe they are just really confused and/or hateful and/or unexpectedly stupid". People don't read economic stats but they'll notice if 20% of their electricity goes away.
  - nicoburns 5y ago
    I live in the UK, and I don't think energy has anything to do with it. We're producing less electricity because we're consuming less electrcity, which is mostly due to more energy efficient appliances and decreasing industrial usage isn't impacting lifestyles. If you want to point to something, I'd look towards massively inflated house prices (almost 10x over 30 years in some places), and stagnating real wages.
    - roenxi 5y ago
      > ...which is mostly due to more energy efficient appliances and decreasing industrial usage isn't impacting lifestyles. For energy efficiency to cover the change + population growth with no winding back of lifestyles it would need to be something like a 30% increase in efficiency over 10 years, affecting all electrical devices in the country. There is reason to be sceptical that it is a major factor here. Add to that there is an argument/observation (Jevons's Paradox) that increasing efficiency of using a commodity generally doesn't lead to reduced usage. If it made sense to procure X commodity when it generated Y, it makes it even more sensibly to procure X when it gets you (Y+something). As for decreasing industrial use ... the default position when a country jettisons its industry is "gee, that might reasonable upset a lot of people and/or cause social problems!". The changes are rather large. Deindustrialising might foreseeable lead to such things as stagnating real wages, as the country can't produce as many goods, or massively inflated house prices as it becomes more difficult to secure useful work/build new houses.

barbarbar 5y ago

The last part of this comment is very well written. Actually the whole comment is. Having said that there are a lot of EU that is... Well crazy but what was before was not really good either.

peteretep 5y ago

> the lower middle class are (to generalise) materially well-off ... they have large televisions ... through pure boredom/decadence they were radicalised ... about things they largely don't fully grasp 8/10 top parody comment. You could have strengthened it by suggesting they turn to brioche if they don't have enough bread to eat though.

A4ET8a8uTh0 5y ago
Please address parent's post in good faith. The point he was not outlandish or imponderable.
- nindalf 5y ago
  I agree with the parent's post FWIW. However, there is a strong tendency in mainstream thought to have great deference to "the People", however you define it. The voice of the People is the voice of God, in fact. So for a person to claim that well off people turned to radical thought out of boredom and ignorance might be correct, but would be considered not just outlandish, as you put it, but outright heresy. It's not just the UK. It's the US and every other place. Trump wins 46% of the popular vote in 2016 and suddenly there's a deluge of think pieces about how people are hurting and what not. Yeah maybe. But there's a lot of folks out there who love voting for a guy who "triggers libs" and normalizes pussy grabbing. And we're not allowed to say this, because again, it's heresy in a democracy to imply that a large segment of voters could be ignorant or stupid or racist. Another example, this time with vaccines. One person decides not to get a life saving vaccine because he was duped by misinformation online - he's an idiot. 30% of the population swallow the same bullshit - they have valid concerns that we need to empathise with and assuage. If they choose not to get vaccinated, we have to accept their choice. We shouldn't require vaccine passports because it would hurt their feelings and their ability to transmit diseases to their fellow citizens.
  - A4ET8a8uTh0 5y ago
    You touched on a lot of important things and I will try to respond to all of them without distracting myself. I posit to you that 'people hurting and what not' are not merely think pieces ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillbilly_Elegy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillbilly_Elegy ). I remember driving through PA months before Trump's election and recall seeing some of the sadder signs you can read including "Save us Trump". It is not "triggering the libs"; it is genuine despair of no options other than triggering the libs. It is important to understand where it comes from, if one is to have a hope to counter it in any meaningful way. Just using that slogan is a mental shortcut that undermines our discourse. I do not see that understanding. What I see is more targeted messaged intended to inflame pre-existing passions. I do not see discussion. I see bumper stickers. As for democracy, there is an argument to be made that it relies on educated and engaged populace. I am not the biggest fan, because US has neither and a lot of ways to manipulate public opinion are well understood now. And yet, it is still a better option than benevolent dictator, monarchy or some sort of theocracy. Now, we can quibble over whether US is a democracy, which in itself is a discussion for a couple of pages. I do think you have a point with vaccines, but I want you to consider the question of choice, mandates and so on in regards to government imposing choices upon you. What is the lesser evil here?

joshuahughes 5y ago

"In the UK, the lower middle class are (to generalise) materially well-off; they own their own homes, they have a couple of cars, they have large televisions, one partner does not have to work, etc." I'm glad you added "(to generalise)" in there, because I'd class myself as 'lower middle' and most of my family/friends in a similar bracket absolutely cannot function without both partners working, and a majority are renting rather than buying their home. I'd argue that what you've described is only true of those OLDER lower middle class folks (like my parents) who struck it lucky before the housing market lost its mind. The only reason I personally fit into your description (well, I only have one car) is that I was lucky to find my way into the software industry which pays a heck of a lot better than most...

laurent92 5y ago

The average life in UK is to be a drunkard with bad teeth. Don’t take it bad, I love such friends and you may face difficulties with life, but while some find it poetic and party-prone, what does it tell about the country’s care of its citizen? Which other nation has a higher quantity of middle classes who drink themselves to near-death experience every second evening? What does it mean when the middleclass experience is to use pills at every high-school party since 1980? No matter how you look at it, you cannot possibly tell me that the UK-born Englishman has been well taken care of. Especially when the representative TV show of the country is Top Gear, which, besides being awesome and fun to watch, is also stuck in the pollution and selfish age (apart from James May, who timidly looks to the electric future), and shows those drunkards-with-bad-teeth are not at all the lowerclasses or the unlucky, but the normal life up to the top of the society. The crib of Rock’n’roll is now a nation that is desperate for illusions right from the bottom to the top.

nradov 5y ago
You're exaggerating. The UK isn't even in the top 10 for alcohol consumption. https://www.alcohol.org/guides/global-drinking-demographics/ https://www.alcohol.org/guides/global-drinking-demographics/
- ModernMech 5y ago
  It's not top 10, but at 10.4 liters consumed per capita it looks like it might be number 11. Not exactly not a problem.

carschno 5y ago

We have seen an enormous disintegration of social stability in many European countries, if not most. Those parts of the middle class that have not been affected by materially are right to fear they will be. This economic development has been a consequence of the politics of the past decades which have been dominated by austerity, general redistribution of wealth towards the top, and accompanying measures against democratic structures that can include free press, independent justice, marginalization of workers unions etc. Especially more radical parties of that sort like Orban have driven these classical liberal economic developments; mind the hypocrisy in their "illiberalism" claims. Every other topic that has emotional potential can serve as a scapegoat for distraction ("we have to fight the common enemy first, then we can care about the poor"): immigrants, the EU, Jewish/Marxist conspiracies, homosexuals etc. It does not _necessarily_ mean that there are no problems related to other topics (e.g. EU bureaucracy etc.), but that is hardly relevant in these cases. You see this playbook in many countries inside and outside of Europe (e.g. Brazil, USA, UK, Russia, Poland, Slovenia, Turkey, ...).