The Myth Of Social Mobility

by w. Wed Nov 01, 2006 18:43

The only solution to removing this situation is massive government intrusion into people lives, so that we all earn the same amount of money, all go to the same type of school, no one ever having any advantages, and so on.

Actually we say the solution is the abolition of the class based society and the creation of a libertarian communist society, where people have direct control over their communities and the means of production.

by dk Wed Nov 01, 2006 16:04

come on red, there are not just two ideological outlooks to remedy social inequalities.

re: the article, the existence of social mobility that w is questioning seems to me to be a critique of the idea that the working-class can be elevated out of their lower rung of the social ladder by becoming middle-class in their thought, actions, wealth, and status through education, but that this can hardly extend to all due to various barriers. issues of economic resources are those that are mostly raised by this article but there is far more at stake here. to be working-class is often seen as backward, uncooth, unintelligent, uneducated, and undisirable. to be middle-class is positioned as the opposite of this. social mobility exists because of this distinction. because certain ways of being, acting, talking, and certain types of inherited knowledge are prioritised above others in society, they also tend to be prioritised in the education system. i agree with w to a point, social mobility is not an assertainable goal for the whole of the working-class, only those who manage to engage correctly with the meritocratic class-biased education system.

another minor criticism is the exclusion of other inequalities which intersect with class inequalities such as being a member of a minority group, such as theTravelling community for example, who are oppressed in relation to both their class position and their ethnic difference. there are of course many other examples.

final point: the existence of an education system based on meritocracy and social mobility as it's main modes of equality promotion, ignoring the structural mechanisms that place some in a position of privilage and others not, works on the premise that there will in fact always be an underclass - i.e. those who do not perform well in this system. and even if every student ireland woke up tomorrow on an equal footing with regard to social, cultural, and financial resources there would still be only a limited amount of places at each rung of the social ladder. meaning social mobility only for the few.

by red Wed Nov 01, 2006 09:37

Social mobility is there for people, if they want it. And unfortunately every part of Ireland contains snobs and social climbers. How else could a nation of peasants and labourers have developed its own "elites", "ruling class", and so on. And social mobility is more available than ever before. Education is free from Primary to Degree level. If you want to quibble about how free it really is, compare it to a society where its not free, or where education simply isn't available.

The main reason "working class" people don't go to university are to do with social traditions. And in this climate of jobs for all who want them, you don't need a degree to make money. Electricians, plumbers and taxi drivers earn more than most "Arts" graduates.

Having inherited wealth and privilege will always give you a head start over others of you wish to become a wealth-accumulating social climber. The only solution to removing this situation is massive government intrusion into people lives, so that we all earn the same amount of money, all go to the same type of school, no one ever having any advantages, and so on.

by na/a Tue Oct 31, 2006 20:05

I'd agree that social mobility is possible. My father and all his siblings were very much working class, however hard work and ability has now made the the vast majority of them middle to upper middle class.

by Well Known Tue Oct 31, 2006 19:56

All the research shows that 'middle-class' values - not wealth, are the best thing a child can inherit in terms of determining its future life-chances.

If all the research really shows that then you ought to be able to point very easily to some standard work in the social sciences or economics that bears out your statement above.

by guydebordisdeadeducated Tue Oct 31, 2006 19:51

Actually, while bertie and some of those puppets were educated by the christian brothers the big movers in business (the people who control capital and by extension control the government) were educated in the likes of Andrews, Belvedere and Clongows. Bertie is merely a small fish in their big pond.

by sufi Tue Oct 31, 2006 19:07

Au contraire, this story is merely an undigested parroting of all the usual time-worn left-wing assumptions.

All the research shows that 'middle-class' values - not wealth, are the best thing a child can inherit in terms of determining its future life-chances.

Social mobility, while less marked than in the US, is a groiwing phenomonen in our society. The biggest and best example of this new mobility has been the movement of hundreds of thousands of people from the live register into paid employment as a result of the 'Celtic Tiger' and the junking of the worn-out socialist policies that blighted the 70s and 80s (the decades of socialist stagnation).

(One might wonder what Marx would have thought of 'white van man' and other contemporary socio-economic phenomena?)

One interesting study in the US compared the position of children born of single women with a high-school or college education as against a similar sample of children born to two-parent families from across a wide social-educational spectrum. The former did better in terms of upward mobility, despite being raised in much less wealthy circumstances than the average of those in the other group.

Unfortunately, social background still has consequences for the life-chances of many (just look at the children of under-class teenage mums). However, things have vastly improved in recent years with the introduction of liberal economic policies which have created the economic expansion which promotes mobility.

Incidentally, most of the movers and shakers in contemporary Ireland, from Bertie down, were educated by 'the Christian Brothers' and the Presentation and Ursuline Sisters - not Glenstal, Blackrock, and Clongowes.

by w. Tue Oct 31, 2006 18:06

For sale in the wsm book service - http://www.wsm.ie/story/592

by billy Tue Oct 31, 2006 17:07

Please give us a better link as the document that you refer to does not appear to be at wsm.ie.

by randam Tue Oct 31, 2006 00:36

Nice to see the youth developing ideas, wouldn't completely agree with this but it's a start.