[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xmca-l] Re: NYT Op-Ed: Class Prejudice Resurgent

It was the post-World War Two Settlement between the Allies and the Soviet Union which included huge concessions to the organised working class in Europe and America (and Australia) in exchange for Peaceful Co-existence. This for a time gave a degree of prosperity for the organised working class (which Americans have ever since called "the middle class") and this pacified the class struggle. All those sections of the world's population, beginning with the masses of the colonial world, followed by Blacks in the US and then Women, felt that they had been betrayed by this historic compromise, and raised their own demands for emancipation, and the next 50 years was dominated by this new configuration. Somewhere around the 1990s, this began to open up and it became possible to again see class. Which was always there of course,

*Andy Blunden*

Annalisa Aguilar wrote:
Hi Mike,

Why is this the case that 1930s is "non-appropriatable" by later generations? Is it because the stories are not told and shared? McCarthyism? I'm not understanding.

I have a hard time accepting the difficulty groking of it. There are people who are at a gross disadvantage because of a lack of opportunities and lack of advantages.
What is there to grok? It is a sincere question, and not meant to be inflammatory in any way.

Perhaps it is not knowing HOW to discuss it. That is my guess. But there has to be a way to discuss it. Where there is a will there is a way.

Kind regards,


From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
Sent: Monday, December 8, 2014 8:42 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: NYT Op-Ed: Class Prejudice Resurgent

The centrality of class in human relations and psychological development is
a topic that cannot get enough attention, Paul and Annalisa. Its one lesson
of the 1930's in the US (at least) that appears non-appropriatable by later
generations. Or to quote Greg, people have an awfully hard time groking it.

On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe <pmocombe@mocombeian.com

Class is an unspoken topic in America's protestant social structure of
class inequality.  William Julius Wilson caught hell for his 1970s book,
"the declining significance of race," for making the argument that race is
becoming less important vis-a-vis class in determining the life chances of
black folk.

Dr. Paul C. Mocombe
The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc.

<div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: Annalisa Aguilar <
annalisa@unm.edu> </div><div>Date:12/08/2014  8:50 PM  (GMT-05:00)
</div><div>To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
</div><div>Subject: [Xmca-l]  NYT Op-Ed: Class Prejudice Resurgent
</div>Hello esteemed discussants,

I am not normally a fan of David Brooks of the New York Times, but
sometimes he really surprises me. This is one of those times:

It has been my sense that we (as a culture, i.e., my American culture to
which he refers) are more afraid to discuss class then we are to discuss
race, and now it has become even harder, apparently.

I particularly took to this paragraph:

"Widening class distances produce class prejudice, classism. This is a
prejudice based on visceral attitudes about competence. People in the
"respectable" class have meritocratic virtues: executive function, grit, a
capacity for delayed gratification. The view about those in the untouchable
world is that they are short on these things. They are disorganized. They
are violent and scary. This belief has some grains of truth because of
childhood trauma, the stress of poverty and other things. But this view
metastasizes into a vicious, intellectually lazy stereotype. Before long,
animalistic imagery is used to describe these human beings."

Kind regards,


It is the dilemma of psychology to deal with a natural science with an
object that creates history. Ernst Boesch.