Prof. Sony's assertion that the middle class has not really shown collective action prompted me to reflect on such movements. It is in fact true that the middle class in urban areas are not resorting to collective action to protest or voice their opinion save for the odd SMS sent to news channels.
Bomb blasts, deluges etc which have left many people dead has not evoked any outburst from the middle class. The cost of having such collective action is very high for the middle class who do not have a "leader" "the selfless utiliarian" who will initially bear the costs of the collective action.
The media has also projected the middle class as a "market" with rising incomes and not as as class which can influence the decision making process. This view has been accepted by the middle class and has reinforced in their psyche. Hence no felt need for collective action.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
The class character of middle class remains "opportunistic".
This is because the aspirations of the educated middle class conform with that of the high class and the means at their disposal remain similar to that of the lower class.
Historically, the middle class provided able visionary leadership to already existing social under currents.
Blurring of previously well-defined boundaries has made the job of the selfless-utilatarian middleclass intellectual extremely ambiguous.
The grievances are not taking class form because of the asymmetric effect of occurrences.
Market forces have blunted the revolutionary edge of middle class. But state remains aware of its potential and ability to wage struggle if the comfortably ensconced equilibrium of middle class is disturbed.The case in a point is attack on Mumbai.The media coverage particularly of Taj Hotel made it an sensational issue.The outrage felt by the so called urban middle class lead to the change of Home Minister at the centre & CM and Home Minister of Maharashtra.But the distinction here is the issues and cause with which middle class identifies itself has changed dramatically from 60s or 70s.
The middle class is not a cohesive unit. It is segmented along various groups like caste, religion and region, especially in metropolitan areas. Experts speak of upper and lower middle class indicating differences of interests within the broad category. This also could act as a deterrent to the emergence of selfless utilitarians among the middle class as a whole.
sanju (30038)
Speaking about middle class and the media induced psyche, I would attribute the non-collective effort to the large size of the middle class which acts as a hurdle rather than the former one. Moreover, Popkin's theory justifies the psyche that gives priority to self interest first and hence becomes detrimental to the join effort.
@navneet: The example cited can hold true for the "rich class". Similar attacks on Mumbai trains used by the middle and lower middle class did not elicit such a response from the government.
@Sanju: Yes.total agreement.
@Uphar:Very valid argument. I think you can post this comment with some more elucidation.
@Rupesh:I think the "middle class" as such is not defined clearly and the constituents do not have the middle class tag on top of their priorities
Great to see more debate on similar lines as a previous post with concern regarding the disappearing middle class!I would still like to add that the middle class lacks definition.There is no single definition that identifies the middle class today, unlike the upper and the lower classes.Middle class may not be disappearing in totality, but it surely is a lost entity.With blurred boundaries and lack of identity, and people not knowing where and with whom they belong,emergence of a selfless utilitarian is a distant dream.But there ought to be a way out.Can we think of any?
[30093]
why does an attack on Taj resulted in rolling of several heads but nothing happened when local trains were ripped apart. Is media deciding nay manipulating the public discourse when the interests of upper middle class is threatened? I do not mean any disrespect to Jessica Lal or Ruchira or many such cases.But does farmers suicide get similar media attention when compared to these high profile cases? 30 children died of Acute Encephalitis in Gaya and national media comfortably ignored it.We should ask ourselves the reason for the changed priorities of media.Is media changing our mindset or it is just reflecting the changed mindset of ours.
In today's world, the middle class is more concerned about their own sustenance, incentives and earnings. they believe in the myth that anything happening outside cannot happen to them and thus it does not matter to them. they are happy in their material world and think of rebel or change when it affects their own house. now I pose a question that what could be the steps that can motivate our middle class to take either pro active or at least reactive measures.
I am not very sure if the middle class has indeed failed in providing able leadership to mass movements lately. I even doubt if it is a current phenomenon. some examples that have been referred to are indeed persuasive, but are we very sure that there was a need for a movement in those cases. If there was, was there sufficient common discontent. can we pin the middleclass down and hold them responsible???
@Navneet
Private media houses will publish whatever sells. Only news that affect the reader group will sell.
The group which is affected and the group that reads the newspapers you talk about are not the same. i am sure cases of encephalitis were reported in the local newspaper in Gaya, it even got local attention.
It is the inherent handicap of the 'capitalist' media.
For a revolution to be aptly supported by media, we would need a media chiefly dedicated to revolutionary motives. Profit earning media houses will hardly find it profitable to publish Encephalitis deaths in national dailies, ever.
@Taj Mumbai
A good example of asymmetric effects.
Some rich people died, some bearers and bellboys also died. the bell boys must have been from the lower class, but would their death incite emotions in the lowere class?? would they even identify them as one from among them?? I doubt.
For the rich it was more of someone's huband, someone's wife etc dying rather than a class member dying.
It didnt incite any class feeling whatsoever.
Post a Comment