Classism in America • Hacker News Board

Re: Classism in America

#101

Post by nxzero » Wed, Apr 06, 2016, 5:55 PM UTC

PaulHoule wrote: post #81

nxzero wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you responding to my comment? If so, unclear what race has to do with my comment, or for that matter, the topic.

It's a clear case where there is a gap between a community segment and the police and also my original comment was about my own experience of what seems to be "hyper white privilege" in terms of grooving along abnormally well with the cops.

Root cause of this is not communication, it is cognitive dissonance theory and the power of authority.

To see an example of what I mean, watch the trailer for the "Stanford prison experiment" on YouTube:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=3XN2X72jrFk

And read about it here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment

As for "getting along" - it's more about selection bias than anything else; which in some, if not many, cases takes the form of racism.

It's an important topic to me, and I'd be the first to say I still don't completely understand it, or more importantly, how to fix the issue.

Re: Classism in America

#102

Post by henrikschroder » Wed, Apr 06, 2016, 5:55 PM UTC

JPKab wrote: post #11

Because of where I grew up (rural South and Appalachia), my native accent is something that I've learned to mask in all professional settings. It doesn't matter how immaculate my grammar is: in the profession of software engineering, southern accent = ignorant bigot who can't be trusted. People's biases, conscious or otherwise, are noticeable. The irony is that I practice "code switching", so basically my coworkers h…

Since no-one else mentioned it yet in this subthread, the phenomenon you are discussing is called a sociolect:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociolect

Basically, since class is culture, and cultures have language, a sociolect describes the language of a class, the ways you have to talk to perform that class.

And, naturally, this goes both ways. Someone talking the sociolect of a certain class is seen as performing that class, and therefore belonging to the class.

It should also be noted that the original article is itself a class performance! The author uses more complex words and grammar than necessary, thereby signalling academia or professional class. (Someone in the comments on that page wondered why this article had a more complex language compared to other articles by the same author, but didn't connect the dots...)

Re: Classism in America

#103

Post by biztos » Wed, Apr 06, 2016, 5:57 PM UTC

rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #44

Geography plays a huge role in determining social classes and the perceptions of them. It also influences spending habits.[1] In New York, for example, it has been shown that people across the income spectrum there will pay more than the national average for shoes and watches. New York is very wealthy and urban, so you are always walking and being seen in your shoes (and checking the time) and it confers a sense of c…

Well, in San Francisco it's actually never bikini season, but otherwise this makes sense.

Re: Classism in America

#104

Post by soundwave106 » Wed, Apr 06, 2016, 6:00 PM UTC

maxerickson wrote: post #50

zeveb wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is why it's so odd that she doesn't want to discuss race, which like economic class is merely a first-order approximation of social class. In general, of course, I find the idea of announcing 'derailing' topics to be ridiculous, meaning something like, 'here are my thoughts on a topic: you are free to talk about your thoughts in these related areas, but not those related areas, because I don't want you to, and…

So why not elucidate on the themes of the essay, explaining how they play out racially? This will nicely illustrate that it is a mistake to announce derailing topics. All you've done is complain about it (i.e., derail).

Personally, I think racial issues are too often far closer to the social class issues mentioned in the article, than economic ones... or even genuine full blown racial hatred. A lot of times, it is more mannerisms -- how someone speaks, how someone dresses -- that seem to be a huge amount of what is described as "racist".

So many times, when you hear racism of any kind, it's more complaints about mannerisms. Stuff like: That black person, dressing up in "gangster" (read: hip-hop fashionable) clothing, playing "gangster" music (also read: general hip-hop), well, to the racist, he must be a "thug". Regardless of how rich or poor that person is, regardless of the actual lack of "thuggery", etc.

Put a similar black person in a business suit, adjust the mannerisms to be more "professional" for a lack of a better term, and the person becomes more acceptable to the "professional" type classes. (However, he might be an "Uncle Tom" to some of his black peers, and he probably won't impress the "blue collar" social class either.)

You can go on from there. I do think there are general "I hate everyone who is xyz race" people out there as well, but I almost would be willing to say that a lot of racism is more the sort of social class issues identified in the article. The race is almost more of a side note as a way people over-generalize, kind of like the "Southern accent = hicks" over-generalization mentioned above.

Re: Classism in America

#105

Post by nxzero » Wed, Apr 06, 2016, 6:14 PM UTC

ska wrote: post #97

nxzero wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Happy to do so, please explicitly state a question, refrain from the tone you've taken, and state what if any experience you have on the topic.

Honestly didn't mean to have a "tone" - unless you mean my comment about evolutionary psychology, which is just balderdash in general. Anyway, I can't really see the connection you trying to make, are you saying that something innate to (some of) the people who choose policing as a career overrides their training? Or that police training is in some particular way unsuccessful in modifying mental models?

Yes, your response to evolutionary psychology was not constructive in my opinion; also, just to be clear, I'm very sure I make tone mistakes too. As for evolutionary psychology, I see your point, and happy with leaving it at that; meaning evolutionary psychology, like much of the field is not a science.

Any rate, what I am saying is that some types of personalities (that develop prior entering a life of crime or law enforcement) predispose individuals to enter either one, the other, or both.

Special forces has a saying, that is, you're either born to be a seal, or you're not; which is to say, training will never make you something that you're not, but it will weed out those that can't be trained; reference the seals, since they're at the extreme of having a very develop mental model prior to training.

Re: Classism in America

#106

Post by henrikschroder » Wed, Apr 06, 2016, 6:18 PM UTC

kbenson wrote: post #82

I haven't finished the article yet, but one thing that strikes me is the flamboyant use of vocabulary. Given the topic, I'm not sure whether it's just a peculiarity of the author, an attempt to tailor the reception of the piece with regard to specific audiences, a slight trolling or the reader, or a combination thereof. For example, early on we get "impecunious" and "shibboleths", followed up shortly afterwards with…

Since it's an essay about class as performance, I thought it was obviously playing with the professional/academic performance that the piece is itself?

Re: Classism in America

#107

Post by LyndsySimon » Wed, Apr 06, 2016, 6:21 PM UTC

Intermernet wrote: post #8

hyperliner wrote: post #3

This is a very good article. In America, there is also an example where we "build up" the social class of some segment to compensate for our self-centered guilt. Take the example of the military service. The vast majority of people would rather be at the mall and let someone else fight and die for the country. But the "I support our troops" bumper sticker is everywhere, or maybe they sent ten bucks to Fisher House or…

The troops example is a tricky one. Many people disagree with war as a way to solve problems, but respect that soldiers aren't actually responsible for said wars, and are doing a horrible job in horrible circumstances. Thus you can support the troops, but deplore the actions of those who caused them to be there in the first case. I do agree that volunteering at a veteran's hospital would be a perfect way to contribut…

> I do agree that volunteering at a veteran's hospital would be a perfect way to contribute though.

I'd like to explore this statement a moment - know that I mean absolutely no offense.

Would you agree that volunteering at a hospital for wounded ISIS fighters is similarly noble?

Re: Classism in America

#108

Post by rm_-rf_slash » Wed, Apr 06, 2016, 6:23 PM UTC

biztos wrote: post #103

rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #44

Geography plays a huge role in determining social classes and the perceptions of them. It also influences spending habits.[1] In New York, for example, it has been shown that people across the income spectrum there will pay more than the national average for shoes and watches. New York is very wealthy and urban, so you are always walking and being seen in your shoes (and checking the time) and it confers a sense of c…

Well, in San Francisco it's actually never bikini season, but otherwise this makes sense.

San Francisco doesn't have bikini season, it has bikini hours: 10:30AM to 4PM. The other time is reserved for hoodies.

Re: Classism in America

#109

Post by ska » Wed, Apr 06, 2016, 6:26 PM UTC

nxzero wrote: post #105

ska wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly didn't mean to have a "tone" - unless you mean my comment about evolutionary psychology, which is just balderdash in general. Anyway, I can't really see the connection you trying to make, are you saying that something innate to (some of) the people who choose policing as a career overrides their training? Or that police training is in some particular way unsuccessful in modifying mental models?

Yes, your response to evolutionary psychology was not constructive in my opinion; also, just to be clear, I'm very sure I make tone mistakes too. As for evolutionary psychology, I see your point, and happy with leaving it at that; meaning evolutionary psychology, like much of the field is not a science. Any rate, what I am saying is that some types of personalities (that develop prior entering a life of crime or law…

Ok, I'm not sure I agree with you entirely but now I can make sense of your point.

I think there is probably some truth in what you are saying, and some pure selection bias. However, I also believe that there are many modifications to ones mental models that happen through training - that a) are probably very opaque to the recipient and b) do not occur naturally/intuitively almost ever.

Re: Classism in America

#110

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Apr 06, 2016, 6:50 PM UTC

maldusiecle wrote: post #77

haberman wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bourdieu and Weber are "rando bloggers" compared to Marx, perhaps we should write them off too?

Presumably anyone studying Weber and Bourdieu has also studied Marx. Anyway, Weber's influence on sociology is huge, comparable to Marx's, and Bourdieu was obviously influenced by Marx, so your comparison doesn't work on any level, really.

[deleted]