David Cameron has few uses, but at least his existence draws attention to the overclass, which emerged, in the 1980s and 1990s, as a result of the same processes as produced the underclass, and which is at least as cut off from life as it is normally lived, but which is much less numerous, is concentrated almost exclusively in one corner of the country, and is much more pernicious economically, socially, culturally and politically.
Although related to the old aristocracy, its members have no social conscience, rather regarding their enormous wealth as "merit", and as entitling them to behave in absolutely any way they see fit, not least with regard to drugs. (Cameron has now pulled off the same evil trick twice, first defining "a normal university experience" as necessarily including illegal drug use, and now doing the same thing with secondary schooling. What next? And when is someone going to take him on?)
Between 1688 at the latest and 1914 at the earliest, the political life of the United Kingdom and of her predecessors was defined by the struggle between the expanding middle and the top. There might have been dire consequences for the emerging working class, but the process eventually delivered it the means of redress. Yet the middle class has now been conned into believing, both that its own interests are identical to those of Cameron (demanding that Blair condemn calls for curbs on City bonuses) or of George Osborne (rushing to defend private equity funds), and that the skilled working class (so comparable in income, concerns, and often even tastes these days) is indistinguishable from the characters on Shameless. The actual median wage for full-time work is around £23,000: that is the real middle.
Cameron should not have seen the last of that Bullingdon Club photograph, nor should he have heard the last of everything that it represents. But he probably has, pretty much. So he will carry on selling himself, Blair-like, as just an ordinary (if vaguely upper-middle-class) husband and father in early middle age. No, he isn't.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In fact the Overclass and the Underclass lead a symbiotic existence. The Underclass would not be able to exist at all were it not for the massive subsidies the Overclass provide it via the Socialist state. But they in turn pay the price of the moral and cultural decay that has been legalised into existence for the sake of the Overclass's playtime at the expense of their own spiritual and physical wellbeing.
ReplyDelete"the massive subsidies the Overclass provide"
ReplyDeleteReally? They pay tax hardly, if at all.
Well, you seem to have coined the term, buddy, so I dare say you know whether or not "the Overclass" pay tax (if they exist at all, that is). But the fact is that most of the Government's revenues come from a small minority of the population and go towards subsidising the lifestyles of a majority who don't pay tax at all. And that's the nature of the financial system that the present iniquity is based on.
ReplyDelete"But the fact is that most of the Government's revenues come from a small minority of the population and go towards subsidising the lifestyles of a majority who don't pay tax at all."
ReplyDeleteThe non-taxpaying classes are found at both ends, but they are not the majority of the population.