Libertarian
pundit Charles Murray (famous – or infamous, depending upon one’s perspective –
for his book, The Bell Curve) has recently published a new book, Coming
Apart. In his newest book, Murray focuses on white America and argues that
a new divide separates and increasingly isolates the upper and upper middle class
from the working class.
Murray
defines the upper classes as:
We have 20 percent in the
upper-middle class as I've defined it, managerial jobs, professional jobs,
college education. Within that group there is the very successful, the top 5
percent of the 20 percent alright, who run the country. Now some of them run the
country in terms of their local city, they're influential wherever they live.
Some of them just run the country -- period -- if you're talking about
Washington, D.C., if you're talking about financial centers in New York,
Hollywood, that kind of thing. They are different, they have become different
over the last several decades in all sorts of ways. They have essentially a
very distinctive culture. They get married a lot later than the rest of the
country, they have somewhat different child-rearing practices.
The new upper class devotes
incredible amounts of effort to raising their kids but that also includes
incredible amounts of effort in getting their kids into the right preschool in
some elite communities which I think is going a little bit too far. And they
also have given rise to what are called "helicopter parents" because
they hover. So there are lots of good things about the way the new upper class
raises kids. Pregnant women, if you're a member of the new upper class, and
you're a woman, and you have a whiff of pregnancy not a drop of alcohol, not
any exposure to secondhand smoke, no drugs, and they take care of themselves
magnificently while the child is in utero. That's good! The lengths to which
they go is sometimes kind of extreme. I could form a mosaic of these
distinctive cases and preferences but you know what? An awful lot of the people
who watch the NewsHour know exactly what I'm talking about already.
The average American watches TV
about 35 hours a week. Among the new upper class you have sort of two basic
attitudes toward TV. One is you still have one, but you use it to watch the
NewsHour and "Masterpiece Theatre" and maybe "Downton
Abbey." The other says that we don't even have a TV anymore -- that kind
of attitude. Well, do I think watching 35 hours of TV a week is a terrific
thing to do? Not particularly. But do I think you're shutting yourself off from
a lot of American culture if you are so completely isolated from what goes on,
on popular TV? Yeah, you are! And if you don't see the movies that other people
see, if you don't eat at the same kinds of restaurants, if you don't engage in
the same kinds of interest and sports and the rest of it, none of these are
terrible things, it's not good vs. bad. It is isolation however of the new upper-class
from the mainstream of American culture.
He
defines the working class as:
When I'm talking about the white
working class, here's what I'm defining: high school degree, no more, and
working in a blue-collar job or a low-skilled service job. When I'm talking
about the white, upper-middle class, I'm talking about people who work in the
professions or managerial jobs and have at least a college degree.
(To
read more, cf. Paul Solman and Elizabeth Shell, “Charles
Murray on Downton Abbey, Smoking During Pregnancy,” at Making Sense, March
21, 2012)
Where does Murray place you, in
the upper classes or the working class? To find out, take his 25 question quiz.
His quiz will also give you his appraisal of how well, if at all, you bridge
the gap between the classes.
I’ve not read his book, Coming
Apart. However, I do find his suggestion of a new class divide in the United
States persuasive. I’m unwilling to impose blanket value judgments on the habits
of each class. Obviously some habits – watching 35 hours of TV per week or obsessing
about a child’s admission to the right pre-school, for example – are unhealthy.
Similarly, some habits – getting together with friends or maintaining a
reasonable weight – are healthy. But as my examples illustrate, each class has
some healthy and unhealthy habits.
What does concern me, more than
assessments of particular habits, is the growing polarization that I observe
and experience in American society. A social fabric that lacks elasticity will tear
sooner under the normal stresses and strains of change. When the pace of change
accelerates (as has happened), potential tears become more precipitous with
larger consequences.
One of the important functions of
religion has been to create community, adding elasticity and strength to the
social fabric. Murray’s work suggests, and other research confirms, that
religion is increasingly a source of polarization rather than community.
Reversing that trend is easier
said than accomplished. Not only have people seemed to become more intransigent
but they also identify several issues as litmus tests of people with whom they
can cooperate or exist in community (e.g., abortion, gun control, and gay
marriage). The answer is not necessarily compromise on deeply held convictions
but learning to respect and to celebrate diversity (cf. my previous post on
civility, Further
thoughts on civility).
No comments:
Post a Comment