Capping a night filled with myriad events and intersecting cliques was a quick stop at a local bar. I got caught away from my group, and found myself in conversation with two 20-something women. One of them had an Obey pin on her cardigan. I asked her somewhat insidiously if she had attached it herself or if the cardigan came that way. It came that way.
My mind was spinning to analyze the irony of decadent phenomenology and the implications of how this cardigan arrived on this woman’s torso. Suddenly, the two of them launched into a bizarre explanation of everything they were wearing and how much it cost. The cardigan was $175. The other woman’s hoodie was $200; it was designer, had purple sparkles, and was not so apparently worth the investment. Her crystal dinosaur necklace was a modest $100. And so forth.
I was disappointed in myself for the arrogance of my question, its venomous teeth hidden safely behind a pretense of innocent conversation. Moreso, however, I was somewhat stunned by the absurd predictability of the interaction. And then I had to think, why the hell would you volunteer that information? We are an ostentatious generation. I’ve certainly spent silly amounts of money on designer products, but it’s not something I tell strangers about. Is it not naive to assume that others come from similar socioeconomic backgrounds? If I were, their display would have been an odd show of force. Since I am not, I could not help but feel tinges of classism. What I witnessed was either sad ignorance of or elitist pride in privilege.
I could be getting it all wrong. Either way, my hermit inclinations flex in the presence of such severe disjunction.
May 21st, 2008 at 5:02 pm
Classism? Hmm, tough to say. Snootiness? Well, we’re all a little guilty of that, and you’re rightly self-critical on that front.
People spend their money in all sorts of irresponsible ways, which is justly their right. Some of us buy iPods, handbags, and leather shoes. Others expensive and largely impractical bicycles and automobiles. In the end we do this for any number of reasons both that we’re aware of (expensive clothes fit better, pista concepts weigh next to nothing) and try to hide from ourselves (”I’m ahead of the curve in fashion, take a look at my ass in these pants, watch me do a track stand without even trying). Much of the time it’s about status, not class. Wearing an expensive suit or necktie doesn’t indicate an antagonism for the lower classes. Quite the contrary, philanthropists always have the nicest clothes. Instead, I’d contend that the desire to surround ourselves with expensive things betrays an apathy toward the suffering of the poor and an acknowledgment that the world simply isn’t–and possibly can’t be–fair.
Were these girls trying to impress you? Maybe; I’d bet that they were trying to give you a preview of what it would take to be with them: a good deal of material affection. They like nice things, and since they’re not fighting a war on poverty, they’re happy to live a free life and do what makes them happy. Inequality of conditions is not injustice, and though Tocqueville was right to notice that history is an equalizing force for humanity, history will not be ending any time soon. Why should these nice girls deny themselves the excess that they or their parents or their parents’ parents worked so hard to bless them with? Why toil to climb the ladder if being towards the top makes you a douche bag? because that Gucci purse is sooooo HOT!!!
“Fair is what you pay to get on the subway” -Dad
May 21st, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Flagrant displays of material wealth constitute elitism, that is, pride in one’s status. Pride is, at least in part, the absence of humility. Because these women have attained what they have largely because of institutional privilege, they should be humble about what they have. That said, their elitism constitutes classism, because it implies that they deserve what they have, and, by contrast, that those who have not deserve not.
“Why toil to climb the ladder if being towards the top makes you a douche bag?” This is a good question. Climbing the ladder involves stepping on others, which necessitates severe disregard for the wellbeing of your fellow human. I see no reason or excuse for this.
“Inequality of conditions is not injustice.” Yes it is. Unless you’re a social darwinist.
May 23rd, 2008 at 1:07 am
I believe it comes down to a general lack of an understanding of the system of exchange. If as individuals we realized the degree to which we are exploited in labor perhaps our eager participation of the exploitation of others would reduce.
May 23rd, 2008 at 12:17 pm
Well said.
May 23rd, 2008 at 12:26 pm
I’m really think that you’re applying some judgments to these girls that don’t necessarily apply, Jack. Presumably they bought the nice clothes because they wanted them, not necessarily because they felt that they deserved them; in fact, I imagine that questions of deserve didn’t even enter their minds–more likely thoughts of afford.
Anywho, I definitely take issue with the last line of your response. You can’t afford a hummer but some people can. Do you feel the victim of injustice because of this want? That all men are created equal we take for granted, but it’s difficult to form even the most theoretical framework in which true equality of conditions serves as a prerequisite of justice. Plato struggled to develop such a system in the Republic and it led Socrates to conclude that socialism of sex (i.e. breeding generations in commune and distributing the children to state-matched parental units–btw is the term “socialism of sex” the traditional term for describing that? It doesn’t sound quite right) promoted justice through equalizing conditions of birth.
I simply won’t be called a social darwinist simply because of my conviction that one has the limited right to exercise the fruits of his own labor as he sees fit, whether that be by purchasing a hummer, a hummer (boingggggg), or saving the money to deliver his children a better life.
May 23rd, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Perhaps “inequality of conditions” is too broad. I intended to refer specifically to what would more appropriately be described as “inequality of opportunity.” The point being not that everyone must be on equal footing, but everyone must have equal opportunity to achieve their goals. We live inside of an oppressive system of institutions which serve to severely limit the opportunities of the vast majority of human beings living in this society, while militantly protecting the stronghold of illegitimate power which houses a tiny, tiny percentage of the population.
The fact is, humans will never experience pure equality of opportunity, because our natural diversity of faculties suits us for a range of roles which have a range of consequences. We can, however, move towards increased equality of opportunity by abandoning the institutions that oppress people.
Now, as this concerns those girls, I agree that deserve did not enter their minds. They probably don’t even consider whether or not they deserve their material possessions, because they feel entitled to them. Entitlement is ignorance of privilege. You could very easily produce an ad hominem in attempt to discount my argument, but please just trust that I struggle daily to come to terms with my privilege and understand its implications for my responsibility to the rest of humanity and the role that I will have to play in this struggle.
I also have to quickly reflect on my own remarks by noting that they could be perceived as sexist. To allay that criticism, I want to acknowledge that women are socialized to acclimate to male standards, which include self-legitimating through conspicuous consumption. We are all caught in a vast network of influences, and I am not trying to degrade these women by analyzing them. They are, however, simultaneous victims of sexism and perpetrators of classism.
May 24th, 2008 at 11:57 pm
For what it’s worth, I wholeheartedly approve of your use of “myriad” as an adjective and not as a noun, as in “a myriad of events”. Bravo!
June 2nd, 2008 at 9:07 pm
Ignorance is not an excuse. Ignorance has been and will continue to be the cause of the worlds suffering. That being said, I do not believe that anyone has the right to hate or judge others for their ignorance. We all are. However, using this Jack’s encounter to shed light on the contradiction and oppression experienced across our social landscapes is crucial. Spending $100 on a trendy necklace that will be out of style next season, to me, is disgusting. The world and the majority of its peoples are raped due to America’s allegiance to consumerism. Wearing designer clothes has ONE purpose: to designate you with the haves, not the have not’s. It’s designed to divide people.
Injustice has existed universally, throughout history. But throwing your hands up, and saying it is inevitable and therefore you are not responsible, is cowardly. Our time, I think, will be remembered as the age when we walked the earth blind, refusing to accept that we were destroying out great grandchildren’s future and we refused to believe that we live in grandeur and luxury at great and horrific human and environmental expense. I do not only mean the significantly rich OTHERS. I mean you and me baby. The privilege predominantly white, bred middle-class, young, seemingly revolutionaries, who think we are smart because we go to college. Example A: ME. I live with incredible wealth I take for granted. I can eat meat three meals a day; I have my own vehicle, 2 bikes, a lap top, redic. amount of clothes, going out to eat 3+ times a week, my own bed, an apt. I share with only one other person….. 6+ million ppl will never be able to have the infrastructure and lifestyle I lead. Because I live in excess, others live without. Period.
To clarify my strong condemnation to the American lifestyle: it has been advertised around the world, and is assumed to be possible for all of humanity. Consequently, orgious consumption has spread across the world, further increasing the class divide and earths decay, all for hopes of a Dream that is a lie and a myth. It has also made the United States the largest super power in earth’s history. Such consumerism is unsustainable and must stop. Doing so, however, will result in capitalisms collapse and a global depression. The global elite don’t want us to stop soothing life’s sores with consumerism, the have succeeded in making it a world religion, more global and prevalent then Christianity. It will take incredible will power too intentionally change the path humanity is following intense momentum. Fortunately, I don’t think planet earth will give us a choice.
What we need, is to look critically at our society and lifestyle, and what we are responsible for when we do not act, challenge the status-quo, or change our lifestyles.