MessageChrystia Freeland is herself a example of how someone from the low end
of a modern society can transcend social layers and rise to the top of her
field. Born to Ukrainian immigrants in the Peace River area of northwestern
Canada, the most that might have been expected of her was that she would have
become a clerk at a local bank or store. Instead, she wound up doing an
undergrad degree at Harvard and then went on to Oxford as Rhodes Scholar. I
first encountered her when she wrote about the Yeltsin years and the "loans for
shares" scheme in Russia in her book "The Sale of the Century". Having read
that, I can't for the life of me feel sorry for Khodorkovsky.
But my point is that in the kind of open, fluid society that Canada was and may
still be (one hopes) almost anything is possible. I've known lots of young
people from impoverished and difficult immigrant backgrounds who were able to
go to university and pursue good careers. I count myself among them.
Things may be tougher now than when I was growing up. And yes we may indeed
have elites that have larger powers than the common herd. But what we don't
have is the kind of stratification that Europe has had to contend with since
time immemorial and must still contend with even if it has become less
important.
OK, I'll read the Chrystia Freeland article now and see if she supports what
I've just said -- or not.
Ed
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Gurstein
To: 'Keith Hudson' ; 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION,EDUCATION' ;
'Arthur Cordell'
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2011 12:06 PM
Subject: Re: [Futurework] The rise of miserity
Without going into detail Keith your description below is highly highly
GB-centric and applies neither to the US nor Canada nor anywhere else I'm
familiar with... The point about Freeland's article was to show how
disconnected from everyone else the super-elite has become... the upper middle
class at least in Canada and to a degree in the US is a relatively recent
phenomenon -- based on very very rapid economic and population growth post-WWII
and until the last 20 years or so still had immigrant/agricultural/small town
roots...
Also, in Canada and the US you have significant regional issues--particularly
in Canada with regional economies, elites, even cultures which don't fit in an
easy hierarchy nationally. And that is intermixed with newly emerging ethnic
groups who are proving to be very successful in some cases but who are also (in
Canada) regionally based.
The overall situation is much too complex to fit into neat formulae and again
in Canada the short to mid-term economic prospects are fairly good although
they differ significantly (along with their political fall-out) from region to
region.
M
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Keith Hudson
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2011 7:28 AM
To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION,EDUCATION'; Arthur Cordell
Subject: Re: [Futurework] The rise of miserity
Arthur,
Perhaps my condensation of misery and prosperity is premature. Perhaps
someone else will re-invent misterity when times are clearer!
Historians tend not to dwell on the condition of the masses when an empire
or a civilization is in decline (if that is what is happening now), but only on
the follies or mistakes of the elite. But I think there's always been a
middle-class. (It depends on what you in Canada call middle-class. Is it the
same as Americans? What Americans call middle-class is what we in Europe call
working-class -- or at least we did until recently. Anyhow, what I call
middle-class is what Americans would call the professional-class or upper
middle-class. So I'll call it U-class in what follows.)
I think there's always been a U-class. In Medieval society the rich
landowners and royalty always needed a small select band of advisors to oversee
their serfs, to collect the rent, to control their soldier-guards and personal
servants, to look after money and treasures, personal doctors and lawyers --
and, simply, but importantly (if a landowner was sensible), public opinion
feedback in case some sort of rebellion might be in the offing. It was this
U-class that grew enormously in the industrial revolution as many new
individuals burst through as the new super-rich industrialists. I would say
that in this country this was around 15% of the population about a century ago.
I would say that this U-class is about 25% of the population now in an advanced
country. In one sense most of this U-class are "merely" the highly-paid
servants of the very rich, but culturally they are much the same. They send
their children to the same highly select schools of the very rich and their
young people go to the same select universities. (This is very clear in Europe
and I think it's happening rapidly now in America, even if not in Canada yet.)
A good example is given by Crystia Freeland who wrote the long article I
posted earlier -- "The New Global elite". She herself is not rich but as a
top-flight (and well-paid) journalist, she's comfortable when socializing with
the very rich and can probably afford to send her children (if she has any) to
the same schools as the very rich. Her children would grow up in the same
milieu as the very rich and would possibly marry one of them. While the very
rich don't have the same number of personal servants as they used to in
pre-industrial days today's complexity means that they need even more
meritocratic advisors. I would lump all these (the rich plus the U-class)
together as one fairly homogenous elite class as against the masses with a
distinctively different culture. (Of course, there's movement of individuals
going on between them, and there are many "inbetweeners" but this is a
relatively small proportion of the whole.)
Keith
At 08:49 05/01/2011 -0500, Arthur wrote:
We seem to be going back to an earlier era. We can see the problems but
there is no ideological road map to guide us out of the miserity So we see
the problems, write about them, but at a loss to know what to do.
Maybe universality and the middle class were really blips in the long
road of history.
Arthur
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Keith Hudson
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2011 7:28 AM
To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, , EDUCATION
Subject: [Futurework] The rise of miserity
We're now living in a quantum world of superimposed states -- of
Shrodinger's Paradox in which the cat is alive and not alive at the same time.
Of inflation and deflation going on simultaneously. Of fabulous incomes for
some but declining wages in real terms for most. Of enormous enhancements in
efficiency but lower welfare for the needy. Of higher skills than ever before
in history for some but of mass literacy and numeracy skills lower than a
century ago. Of highly profitable multinational corporations but bankrupt
governments. A new word needs to be coined -- "miserity".
Keith
Keith Hudson, Saltford, England http://allisstatus.wordpress.com/2011/01/
Keith Hudson, Saltford, England http://allisstatus.wordpress.com/2011/01/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
