As a high school student (currently studying my Higher School Certificate), I have a limited understanding of the way our society functions, though I am still highly stimulated by political discussions. As part of my HSC course I am required to complete a 7000 word thesis on the 'Hierarchy of Australian Society'.

I am currently analysing how society changes by deconstructing into two levels of social change: Macro - Change for society as a whole and Micro - smaller changes. I am trying to understand:

1. Why are there class differences?
2. What does this serve?

If you have any notions on the above two questions, please take part in this discussion. It will help me greatly, and I believe that it makes interesting and subjective conversation.

It's an interesting question.

In my view, the real reason we have class differences is fundamentally due to the fact that humans are so different - in understanding, ability and wisdom, etc. Due to the law of life that birds of a feather flock together, the like-minded are born into circumstances that allow them to develop in an environment that is right for them. As they clump together, this automatically results in a stratification of society, which over time refines itself into a class system.

I understand your question to impute that politics has something seminal to do with the class system. I disagree with this notion. I believe the politics comes AFTER the event to essentially protect the interests of each of the different groups/classes and to stop the incursion of one into another (eg like Pauline Hanson tried to do in 1996). In summary, the groupings of similar people are natural, the motivation behind the politics is also natural, but the substance of the political discussion is often largely artificial or exaggerated.

As for change - both macro and micro - they are in a state of constant flux. To take the big picture, if it zigs, it's just a matter of time before it zags back again. It's just a question of how and when.

1. Why are there class differences?

Money.

2. What does this serve?

Nothing.

I suspect if a bum one lotto they would move to upper class quite swiftly. Old money and new money seem to be the only class systems at that level. Other levels vary on amounts.

I hope when you have completed your thesis you can tell us about it and what you found Mr Knox.

E Knox I suggest you study it from our tribal roots.There are leaders and followers.Class is based on ability as well as genetics,and how well connected you are.Indian Cast system is based on genetics.

Basically humans are very insecure beings and like to achieve security by achieving status through money or fame.It is a double edged sword that helps organise society but also is the source conflict and even wars.

It is a huge topic .Good luck.

<<..how society changes..by deconstructing into two levels of social change:Macro..Why are there class differences?..>>at the macro level there are the elites who got great gifts of advantage[like free land[or govt pensions..or mineral wealth..ot exclusive franchises

at the macro they need to keep their gifts...thus need to set up excl,usive means to keep their gifts...like exclusive clubs[board memberships...party organisers[or public serrvice...but also via law and other defacto franchises like medicine or science etc

all basiclly kept exclusive by having punitive pricing structures top keep out the riff raf..[or as the elites call them[the useless eaters]
thus we see private hospitals/exclusive suburbs/private insurance/first class travel...

and many other exclusive items only affordable by those with huge income streams via family/trust aRRANGMENTS..or expense accounts...paid consultancies...board positions...favourable terms and of course govt honours and titles...all invitation only

<<2. What does this serve?..>> it serves to keep the inbred elites away from the contagin of poverty and impoverishment...ensuring loyalty to the old school tie...[or the party machine...or the system of govt pensionings

E Knox, class occurs
when women and men boss over each other.
achieve equity between women and men
with a Republic of Australia
comprised of agreement between
women's and men's legislatures
and Australians achieve classlessness.
class serves the interests of a dominant gender.

E Knox while the answers you have got so far are unlikely to help you.
They remind me a long term poster that we are each very different.
I know some who replied are so entrenched in their own ways they can not contribute to your answers.
Yet I remain hopeful, you are asking the questions each generation have asked.
Mine too, a different reality today than my youth far different .
But we have made progress, very much so.
In my childhood children did not get the education or chances they do today.
And just maybe if not your generation the next will find answers.
We do make progress each generation adds to our progress, good luck to yours.

I think RobP has come closest to the truth.
Humans are essentially tribal, and have been since before they were recognisable as Human. In the early tribes, the leader was basically the most useful; strongest, best hunter, best fighter. The shaman (or woman) was probably the smartest; the one who noticed the changing of the seasons, when 'the gods' decided it was time to move on.
As RobP pointed out, birds of a feather do flock together. Eventually, small tribal leaders would come to realise they had more in common with other tribal leaders, than with the 'lower' caste members of their own tribe. They had the same duties and responsibilities, and eventually, the same lurks and perks.
Thus, the aristocracy was born.
At the same time the Shamans would compare notes with other shamans, and create a common religion -which they had a patent on, and sole rights to interpret the word of God.
The aristocrats quite naturally wanted to pass on their privileged position to their children, as still happens today.
Today, business owners still find more in common with other business owners than with their employees. The union movement, while necessary to counter the greed and lack of empathy of the bosses, has merely continued and codified the distinction.
Communism as so far trialled, has failed to address this tribalism. the aristocracy or business class has simply been replaced by party hierarchy.
It appears the best chance of breaking down the barriers between the classes is the co operative movement, where every 'employee' of the enterprise also shares to some degree in the profits and losses, and management decisions.
I suggest you Google Cooperative, and Mondragon, for examples of the most equitable social and economic system yet devised.
The company is the tribe.

Hi E. Knox. While you've shown initiative in posting to this site, I doubt that you're going to get much information from this forum that will be very useful for your HSC assignment. There are some very well educated people here, but most comments tend to reflect opinions based on people's personal experiences and prejudices, rather than any systematic research about the topic under discussion.

'Class' is a huge topic that is not particularly well understood by many people, and their comments about it to a forum such as this will mostly reflect their own position within Australia's class structure. While such opinions are perfectly valid in a political conversation, they're not really very useful to a budding student who wants to learn how to research a complex topic in a systematic and comprehensive way.

I suggest you go to a library and read some introductory sociology texts, particularly those published by Australian authors. There's a wealth of information available from authoritative researchers about class and its manifestation in Australia, with the added benefit that you'll begin to acquire the kinds of research skills that will help prepare you for university studies.

I'm afraid the opinions of anonymous posters to an Internet forum don't really cut it as sources upon which to base a serious assignment.

Good luck!

E Knox, if you want to understand how society lands up with haves and
have nots, google for something called the "Marshmallow Test".

It's a test designed for 4 year olds, about impulse control.
When they followed these kids on into later life, the differences
continued and grew.

Its often been stated that if we gave everyone 100'000 $, within
a short time some would have doubled what they have, others would
have nothing. We commonly see that with lottery winners. Some
blow the lot, some save and invest.

So no matter what you do, there will always be have and have nots,
based on genetics it seems. Thats just the luck of the dna I guess.

Write something about the marshmallow test and I am sure your
teacher will be impressed!

Hello E Knox

I agree with CJ Morgan, you are more likely to receive a spiel of each poster's particular ideology than you are to gain any insight into class distinctions.

However, if you were to survey the background of each poster (and receive an honest answer) you might find some information of worth.

Money/power tends to be the catalyst between those who are highly regarded than those who are ignored, although the possession of money/power has never indicated true 'class'. This is a constant, although the players may vary, for example in Feudal times power tended to be bequeathed by birth whereas in contemporary times money speaks, however contacts are important; look at the rise, fall and reincarnation of people like Alan Bond.

Good Luck.

I thought our individual spiels about how we see a class system opposed to a caste system is what Mr Knox was looking for?

Whether a lotto winner looses it quickly or not, they were for a time considered of another class.

Maybe along with spiels (because the perspective matters) we should be naming which class system we belong to as Fractelle suggests?

Before I announce any I’d rather be clear; Is there a formula for Aussie for determining what class? Was the question only pertaining to the Australian class system?

Middle and upper will obviously say – oh it is because we are so clever it was destiny? Lower will be saying the luck was against them and fate to blame?

I’m sure none of us will be able to figure out the individual truth of it.

Yabby you forgot the foster kids (everyone does); they can be from any class and still not do well once in the system – potential down the toilet. Maybe the four year olds families had a lot to do with it?

How does society change?
By intelligent believable ideas or by dummbing it down for control for which educators are responsible. Many educators rehash others ideas and they may not have properly understood them in reality or context, or have ever verified them in reality.

The way change occurrs is by promotion of a world view that influences people; So their values and attitudes is what is deemed important to the majority. These values occur by example and teaching of ideas.

The changes in our present society have been mostly through (media) television, radio and street talk. By that I mean what are people talking about that they feel is most important to them. Money is merely an object of one's attitude - based in attitudes of greed, generosity or sloth. So by groups lobbying the Government for change the Government has to consider the fears and values of the majority of people in a democratic society.

Social change is currently happening by infiltration of Western freedoms affecting undercurrent changes in China and Iran as evidenced by the peoples movements.

What do you feel needs change in your circle of friends? Start to vision what you want to happen and talk about it. Start a peoples movement. Be positive about what type of society you envisage

Enox

What do you mean by class difference. Not many of us are Hindus. Do you mean wealth or what suburbs we live in or what standard of education we have. This country has more opportunities than most. Most people living in 'poverty' in this nation have made very bad life choices. Many carry a victim mentality which keeps them where they are. Our nation rewards bludging and supports a lifestyle of laziness and drugs. This adds more to class distinction than anywhere else. We have just gone through a boom where anyone who could breathe could get work and yet we still scream poverty. I suggest you go to some countries where poverty exist because of corrupt Governments and compare these poor peoples situations with many here who would not work in an iron lung

E Knox your question is a very relevant one.

Unlike one poster has suggested, “Class” is not about “Money”, at least not in Australia, although the same would not be as wholly true for UK.

If you look at Australian society, 1/3 rd the millionaires and multi-millionaires are first generation migrants, example Richard Pratt. These people arrived without allegiance to any social “Class” and made their way to the top of Australian society by virtue of their own efforts.

“Class” is neither good nor bad, people who act with “Class” are invariably socially affable. People who act like snobs are merely displaying their lack of real “Class”.

Class differences tend to refer to differentials in socio-economic criteria and circumstance, more than simple “social class”.

Hence, people who happen to earn a little are not the de-facto working class nor are the better off “middle class” and nor are the high-earners “Upper Class”. I would note Margaret Thatcher, who achieved political prominence as a world leader was the daughter of a "Middle Class" shop owner in UK and Disraeli, being Jewish was almost a social outcast (at that time), yet he again lifted himself to the highest political prominence.

To speak personally, like many other Australians, we do not assess our individual merit of success on aspiring to any particular “Class” but on the moral values, defense of our independence and work ethic which we practice in our daily lives.

Those who do consider themselves a particular “Class” are often using it as an excuse / shield for their personal shortcomings, whether that "Class" be "Upper", "Middle" or "Working".

MAybe you should read Maslow and his "Hierarchy of Needs", before completing your dissertation... you will find it an interesting comparision from which to view people, beyond the limited context of which you are presently asking and being fed.

Society is a fascinating subject and one of the most fascinating changes to a society was when Christianity took over Roman Society. The Romans were a society that was arguable the most civilized for it time, and at one time the centre of the Roman Empire, was in York in England and the Emperor lived there. The Romans were in England for about four hundred years, but the startling changes occurred in Italy.

An independent atheist researcher concluded that Christianity took over Rome, by its leadership. Roman society was essentially dirty and there was lots of pollution and unhygienic conditions in their cities. Christians came into these cities and established churches, were persecuted but persisted, and over a period of three hundred years after the death of Jesus Christ, was the State religion of Rome.

Because it was dirty and they had no contraception, it was safer for a pregnant woman to have her baby, and throw it out if it was unwanted, than to have an abortion. These babies were left on the streets at night for the dogs to eat, but the Christians believed in the sanctity of life, and gathered up lots and lots of babies and reared them. The ones thrown out were mostly girls, so the Christian Churches had lots and lots of female members, while Roman families had many more males. When it came time to seek out a mate, the only places with a ready supply of wives were the Christian Churches, so the males became Christians to get mates.

When the plagues struck, spread by rats and fleas and dirt, Society fled to the country, but the Christians stayed behind and cared for the sick. Based upon their belief that we are only in this world for a limited time, and having faith in their God, the Christians cared for the sick and comforted the dying. The same sort of thing is happening in Africa today with Aids. The Christians are staying and helping the sick and orphaned, in places like Uganda, and caring for the widows and orphans

Little changes in simple things can have macro effects on the way society functions. The simple expedient of abolishing jury trials in civil matters in New South Wales to satisfy a gangster, has created an Australian Aristocracy, with an arrogance to rival the flashest European Prince. Admission to this aristocracy is through the Legal Profession, and that is the only way in. It has come about because the great egalitarian philosophy that is Christianity has been set aside, and a new philosophy based on dishonesty and corruption has taken its place.

Before 1970 in New South Wales these Effete Snobs, were not entitled to judge another person without consent. To sit without a jury, required written consent and it was no use bribing a Judge, because he did not make the decision. Since then New South Wales has become Rort Central, and as they said in another posting, the tender process is controlled by the party in power, and they determine who gets the work. The rorters simply build in the graft into their price.

There is a conflict between the Federal and State Parliaments, which the last Liberal Government lacked the will to tackle, simply because it was using the State Governments to do what it was prohibited from doing itself because of the Constitution. There is an ineffective and useless Federal Supreme Court in Canberra, with hopeless lawyers getting $7,000 a week tax free as the head Aristocrats in Australia. Most but not all these aristocrats are from certain elite schools but not all.

The other class of aristocrats are the leading politicians, who use their positions to establish personal fortunes, or simply sit back and let the Parliamentary Superannuation they have make them rich. That route to aristocracy is fairly dangerous, but for a lawyer, can lead to a position as a Judge, and the Holy Grail.

We agreed to merge all denominations in a Commonwealth. At your age I had high hopes for it. Little did I know that micro changes, little things like allowing Judges to make laws independently of Parliament, would destroy my Australia

I'm sure E Knox will find Peter the Babbler's latest fanciful ramble very useful in addressing his/her assignment on the 'Hierarchy of Australian Society' - not to mention the equally irrelevant contributions of various others.

Like I suggested before, E Knox should go to a library and get some authoritative information about the notions of class and social change how they manifest in Australian society. It wouldn't be a bad idea if some of the adults here did the same.

E Knox, some more advice - define your terms and stick to your topic. Avoid extraneous diversions into irrelevant notions like caste, Hinduism, Maslow's (psychological) hierarchy of needs, the Marshmallow Test and abortions in ancient Rome.

Some people here would clearly fail your high school assignment, which is another good reason to source your information and ideas somewhere a little more reliable.

Cheers.

Reference to 'class' is not appropriate in Australia. Class distinctions in Britain and Europe were hereditary, arising over many, many generations. Some still exist.

Our founding fathers were determined that class distinctions would not hold sway here - although a few people like squatters - gave it a try and were badly disappointed.

Anyone who talks about class in Australia is a Leftist expounding the politics of envy (many people see money as a divider).

If you have reached HSC standard without knowing that class does not exist in Australia (in the true meaning of the word), you have been badly let down by your teachers and the education system.

You should not be looking here for answers; all the responses will be politically loaded - including mine, many will say.

For heavens sake, talk to someone at school. Get into some history books. Don't rely on people you don't know, again, including me.

One way society changes, is by maturing. The average age of a society to some extent determines its conduct. We have reasonably good medical systems, many of us get our three score and ten plus some, and some of us get wiser as we get older.

Have a look at Irish society. It was predominantly Roman Catholic, and supplied a great number of the early settlers to Australia. It was rebellious against the English, and with the supplies of guns and trained men, trained in the British Army in WWI, funded from Irish Americans, Britain was sensible to let them have a republic. Since the same society now has no oppressive enemy to oppose, and the only legitimate way to oppose it, was to belong to the Roman Catholic Church, the influence of the church has waned. They still teach most children, but after school ends, there are few who attend more than a few times a year.

Irish Congregations in Australia are struggling for Priests, and many times the Priest can hardly speak English. When the Priest is drawn from Latin America, he still practices the same religion, but the articulation is difficult.

Some people are born with innate abilities. It is said that the top two percent in intelligence create ninety eight percent of the jobs. Gout, that pesky little build up of uric acid that swells joints and makes so many men limp, predisposes an individual to success. Leaders rise up and show the way, and can change society dramatically, just look at Robert Mugabe, he is both a lawyer and a Roman Catholic: A Disastrous combination.

Education and how it is slewed can change society. If you are not taught to question everything your teachers are falling down on the job. Doing basic research these days is so much easier, when you use your Google. However you are required to conform or be failed. Give the professor what he wants and you will get credits, try to be original and you may get ahead of your teachers. Most of all have fun

Many people will have you believe there is no class difference in Australia. This is very false. There is a definite hierarchy that exists in our society.

The wealthy and the powerful have a vested interest in both denying class exists while perpetuating it for their own means. The same thing happens with racism. The ruling classes are more than happy to have immigration because it keeps their businesses and profits growing while at the same time sowing racism and racist attitudes in the lower classes so as to keep them divided and powerless.

By their use of the media, which they own, and the advertising industry, which serves them gratefully, they perpetuate the myths that poor people are responsible for their own poverty and have no one to blame but themselves and that rich people are that way from some innate superiority or even more fatuously from hard work. As if being paid 250 times the average they are working 250 times harder than your average min wage slave. Sick isnt it that we fall for this so easily.

They use the education system to make people submissive and compliant. "Obedience" they call it. They have the state and politicians in their pocket and bribe them at will and call it "political donations". The state in turn supports and protects its mates with laws, policy and the hired thugs we call the police. Many people are incarcerated to protect the propertied classes.

The facts remain that being born rich or poor will decide the outcome of the vast majority of lives. The few who rise from poverty are always held up as the example anyone can follow but the fact is that old money is the overwhelming resident of the top ten percent of the wealthy. If you are born rich you have all the advantages if you are born poor your screwed before you even start. The few who reverse this trend are overwhelmingly effected by chance and good decisions that pay off massively.

The same goes for rock stars and celebrities. Does anyone seriously think being paid millions for a few minutes/hours writing some song or acting is normal? This is a massive distortion and it has led to young people seeing fame as the only way out and being prepared to do anything to get it. But it takes peoples minds away from the actual picture of the ruling class being the only ones to really have any freedom in our society and even they arent really free. They are scared to death of the teeming masses and fear for what they have and so what they could lose.

The church backs this philosophy and uses it to further its own power over its adherents by assuring them that god knows what he is doing and no matter how bad your life is now that if you devote yourself to their teachings you will be better off after you die. Old churches may be dying out but at least they had a compassionate veneer the new evangelicals have nothing but hatred for the poor and they teach a gospel of prosperity (for the faithful) and retribution (for everyone else).

This traid of church, state and money is what rules over us and has done so for the last few hundred years. The class system that has developed works to entrench the privilege and power of the few and make sure that the overwhelming majority stay impoverished and at the whim of the bosses and landlords and the moneylenders

OK, maybe I did paddle my own canoe a bit hard, but I maintain my point about tribalism is still valid.
The aristocracy came about when tribal leaders became a tribe of leaders.
I remember watching a Ray Martin show many years ago, about a bunch of society dames having a 'charity lunch'. After the 4 or 5 of them spent over a grand on a meal with wine and the works, they all chipped in $20 each for the poor.
When queried about this disparity, they pointed out that "to the poor, $20. is a lot of money".
In Australia, our tribal leaders are showing the same discrimination.
Oh to be in the same tax bracket as the guy I'm paying to represent me.
Oops, still paddling..

*Oh to be in the same tax bracket as the guy I'm paying to represent me.*

There of course we have the real problem here Grim. Envy.

Yet if you had saved your pennies 30-40 years ago and ploughed
your savings into BHP shares, you'd now be laughing.

Perhaps as a kid, you never passed the marshmallow test :)

Dear E Knox,

Firstly Congratulations for having the initiative
to go on a Forum such as this one in your search
for information. Getting different opinions from
a wide variety of people - will only add to your
education.

Well done!

My strong suggestion to you is - go to your school
library, or your local library, or any large
regional public library - and try to get hold of
a copy of the following book:

"Class in Australia : Who Says Australia has no Class System?"
by Craig McGregor. 2ND EDITION, Published by Penguin, 2001.

As the Summary of the book states, "This revised and updated
edition is a must-have book for all those with an interest
in Australian Society. As the inequalities in our Society
grow; class matters more than ever."

Another excellent book that has a very informative write
up on Class is the general Sociology text -
called - "Sociology," by Ian Robertson. There's quite
an excellent listing under Class in the Subject Index
at the back of the book. Your local library should have
a copy.

Hope this helps.

All The Best

Therein lies the difference between you and I, Yabby.
Less than 10% of the population make the sort of money we pay the people who are supposed to represent us.
while I worry for the 90%, Yabby thinks thinks what's good for Yabby, is good for the world.
Still alright, Jack?

E Knox,

1. Why are there class differences? Because people make them, they are human constructs
2. What does this serve? The question might be better put, “Who?” Rather than “What?, they serve the people who create them, we create them to serve us.

To understand why and how society changes we need to understand the cause rather than the effect. Whilst the effect might be the creation of “class structures” or any other social human construct for that matter, the causes are much more to do with human wants, needs and desires. Since human attitudes, values and beliefs (AVB’s) also vary dramatically, as do our personality types, each responds differently to the key influences on our lives. In today’s world the main influences are social, scientific, political, economic, religious and ecological. (SSPERE factors)

The permutations of the above human influences and attributes result of course, in the 6.5 billion individuals on our planet, however, for the purpose on analysis, we can place individuals into groups, within regions, nations, states, localized demographics or even down to granular family units.

So one possible approach to your “deconstruct” might be to select a “class structure”, examine its key attributes, then examine the human needs and values at group level that would “cause” that class structure to be created.

Sounds very mechanical and process driven however, it is a subject that expands exponentially in terms of content as the deconstruct progresses. So keep it as tight and simple as possible. An added bonus to this approach is the direction and focus it provides to research and further reading. My feeble efforts to research related topics are now up to chapter 14, 65,000 words and still going.

I’ve also found it helpful to view class structures more positively than is typical. You may well discover that as a human construct they are created to serve the needs of those who create them, maintain those who inherit them or sustain the power of those who impose them.

Hope some of this helps, good luck.

*while I worry for the 90%,*

Grim, your worry is of course unfounded, for we know that one does
not need to earn what the top 10% earn, to be happy and content with
life.

Indeed there are plenty of people earning just "average", doing
very well and happy with their lives.

Yet some people, no matter how much they earn, still can't cope.
Michael Jackson earned hundreds of millions, yet blew even more,
still dying in debt.

What does make people miserable however, is envy. No matter what
they have, they want even more, above all as much as the other guy
or even more.

Interesting project E Knox

I'm with Col Rouge on this. Class and money are not in any way synonymous.

The class system in the UK that had worked there since the Industrial Revolution may have had some impact on Australia in the early days. But that system died out - even in the UK - after the impact of two world wars.

There used to be an Upper Class, which was effectively titled folk complete with country houses. A Middle Class, which spanned a fairly wide spectrum, but included most professionals - lawyers etc. And a Working Class, whose jobs were in factories, docks, on the farms or as clerks etc.

As Col points out, none of these classifications was determined by money. You could be Upper Class and broke, or Middle Class and stinking rich, but the Class itself did not change. (Two words, Col: Alan Sugar)

There is little left of that system today, and money does seem to play a more important role, but that simply means that Class is being eliminated as a factor, not that it is changing into something else.

“As Col points out, none of these classifications was determined by money. You could be Upper Class and broke, or Middle Class and stinking rich, but the Class itself did not change. ..”

Can you explain that… like an upper class beggar in the gutter would be treated as a higher class and accorded a certain respect by the lower class rich person?

“There is little left of that system today, and money does seem to play a more important role, but that simply means that Class is being eliminated as a factor, not that it is changing into something else.”

Pericles are you looking for a better word than what “class” is to describe the treatment one gets in public when one obviously has money compared to when one obviously doesn’t?

People don’t stop and ask you what sort of person you are or your background when out shopping, they look you up and down and decide how they will treat you based on how you look, what you have, what you drive yeah? So this places you in whichever class doesn’t it?

You can join a different class with money by joining the right clubs, giving to the right charities, living in the right neighborhood? Or if lucky you can be born going to the right schools while your parents do the rest until you can take over? But that all takes dosh.

I've seen lots of users on here say they are working class or middle class (they seem the acceptable two) so I figure it is still in the culture here. It also still appears based on the money earnt.

I agree with Piper.

An individual's status
usually depends on the occupation and income of the
family breadwinner, so people sometimes move up or
down the class system as their economic circumstances
improve or decline. For example, in times of economic
recession there is a general downward trend in mobility
as incomes shrink and workers are laid off. College
graduates, no matter how keen they are to get good jobs,
may find themselves driving cabs or collecting unemployment
benefits.

In times of economic growth, there is an upward trend in
mobility as incomes rise and new jobs are created. The amount
of mobility depends on economic conditions. In a static
economy there is little structural mobility, but in times of
economic change there may be a great deal.

Over the past century the mechanization of agriculture and
the automation of industry has steadily eliminated millions
of low-status blue-collar jobs, no matter how hard those
who occupied them worked. Also the growth of service
industries and of government and corporate bureaucracies
have created heaps of new, higher-status white-collar jobs.
Huge numbers of people are therefore
forced out of a lower status and pulled into a higher status
by factors that have little to do with them as individuals.

However, mobility from one stratum to another is the exception
rather than the rule according to Ian Robertson, "Sociology,"
who tells us
that most people tend to remain in the same social class
as their parents.

Piper, the word you're looking for is "status", which is probably a more useful concept when looking at social hierarchy in Australia.

I think that class, while it has never been as evident in Australia as it is in England, is still more salient than most Australians would like to admit. While we pride ourselves on our egalitarian ethos, there are certain areas of social life that are still quite rigidly stratified - you wouldn't find too many butchers at the opera, for example, nor miners at the ballet, for example.

While there is increasing social mobility related to wealth and status, members of our upper crust tend to marry within each others' families and bequeath their inherited wealth to each other to a much greater extent than we hoi polloi do. In the district where I live, members of the remnant squattocracy still talk about "old" and "new" money, for example.

As I said in my first comment, the notions of "class" and "hierarchy" are very complex when applied to Australian society. For a high school level assignment that aims to "deconstruct" (heaven forbid) such social phenomena, I still think that the OP is best advised to head to a good library in order to work out what it is that s/he is going to "deconstruct".

The various renditions of "class" that have been offered here remind me of the old tale of the blind men and the elephant...

And Pericles, two words: Alan Bond.

Dear E nox
Your questions;
1. Why are there class differences? What does this serve?

Well, in my opinion, it is often due to our welfare system.

You see we have generations who have become 'welfare dependent'. We have situations where young women become single mothers, again and again, why? because they can and the system not only allows it, but it pays them to do so.

We also have a system that allows many to choose between working longer hours or staying home as the family assistance on offer often outweighs the atraction to work.

If there is a family involved, they often live on the same amount of money as a sigle person who works 60odd hours per week.

Now I don't begrudge anyone having children. But hey, if you can't aford them then what gives you the right to expect someone else to provide for them. After all, they're 'your kids'!

In fact, almost half of Australian families are welfare dependant. This is why you have class destinction. The workers who pay (positive) taxes often object to thoses who don't.

Now the real problem is that we also have the 'tall poppies'. Now these are the ones who hate the fact that the workers are well off and, rather than be thankfull for their contributions, prefer to shoot them down.

I recon you will see a few of them shortly.

There is also some confusion between 'wants' and 'needs' and this happens on both sides of the equation.

*There is little left of that system today, and money does seem to play a more important role, but that simply means that Class is being eliminated as a factor, not that it is changing into something else.*

I am going to agree to disagree on that one Pericles. I've just
checked my dictionary and it states "Class is used to talk about
the division of people in society according to their social status".

Now AFAIK, the really rich and famous do classify themselves
according to their money and hang out together, the working class
see themselves as just that. So in a way it has changed into
something else. It certainly fits the definition of my dictionary.

Hey Foxy, so with different classes there is a kind of fluidity depending on the times you live in? This changes the people but not the actual classes involved? Like members of different classes drop in and out?

The ones who do believe it has nothing to do with money have confused me, I don’t see how anyone without the financial backing can be anything but a pretender in a higher class. Like that English Mrs Bucket series.

But you and CJ have now both suggested “status” a better word. Where does this leave Mr Knox and his thesis? He’ll be pointing out there isn’t one but that we try hard…?

… Maybe we’re playing at it, no class system in Oz just subsets like; Sweet, Wannbe, and Outta Luck.

What elephants?

what Sociology books are reluctant to say
because the fashion has been to minimise gender difference
in the transition from patriarchy to equal rights,
and what a student needs to know to thrive,
is that women and men class social inclusion differently.
men tend to view society as hierarchical
women view society as more clustered.

for instance, in organisational behaviour
sociologists have noted a transition over the past half century
from hierarchical corporate structures
to more lateral structures, without drawing comparison
between the primary change in corporate composition,
the massive influx of women.

similarly, the strict hierarchical class structures
of a century ago are now more fluid.

the challenge is to celebrate
women's and men's proclivities
with an equal rights Republic.

The Factors Contributing to Inequality in Australian Society
The existence of difference and discrimination in society, due to inadequate access to socially valued resources such as healthcare , housing, employment and the justice system, permits social differentiation and enables the formation of social classes. Social classes are a chief mechanism of organisation and social control in Australian society, allowing the distribution of power, wealth and privilege as well as the formation of socioeconomic statuses
http://bizcovering.com/business-and-society/the-factors-contributing-to-inequality-in-australian-society/

Social Inequality, Prejudice and Discrimination
Economic inequality is expressed through the unequal distribution of wealth in society.Social inequality is the expression of lack of access to housing, health care, eduction, employment opportunities, and status Class is the main organising principle of modern societies, the mechanism by which power, privilege and inequality are distributed and institutionalised.
http://www.ptc.nsw.edu.au/scansw/socineq.html#anchor327797

Class is] a major feature of subjectivity, a historical specificity and part of a struggle over access to resources and ways of being. Class ... is central to us all, even if we do not feel impeded by it or choose not to recognize it, or to avoid it through disidentifications and
dissimulations
http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-9617693/Social-class-identity-and-the.html

Class plays an important role in how education is accessed, and Commonwealth education policy plays a vital role in determining whether or not class divisions are reproduced or ameliorated. Conservative education policy has the general effect of entrenching current relations of power and privilege
http://www.fabian.org.au/945.asp

Social class key to child's success
Children's social backgrounds are more important even than low birthweight in determining how well they achieve in school and later life, according to researchers.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2002/aug/09/socialsciences.artsandhumanities

Pied Piper “like an upper class beggar in the gutter would be treated as a higher class and accorded a certain respect by the lower class rich person?”

I have met people who put credence into “class”. Often, they were the “working Class” who, for some bizarre reason found an inverse snobbery… (“two bob-snobs” being one common description of them, “fur coat and no knickers” being another) but “snobbery”, none the less in criticizing those who earned more than them and assumed it was as a function of “Class” instead of “Ability and Effort” (commonly referred to a “Work Ethic”.

Despite a common set of parents, I observed criticisms of belonging to a particular “Class” between two of my uncles…. One was class conscious (actually my favourite uncle), he was a lifelong larrikin and was a ships stoker in WWII and worked later as a ship yard labourer and his (more studious) brother, was a RAF test pilot in WWII and later ran a multinational company and did not give any credence to anyone’s “class” but more to their merit as an individual.

Again, if you want to understand any of these defunct ideas of “Class” and believe it has any relevance today you need to ignore the social consequences of WWII and study social orders of 150 years ago.

The world has changed, we no longer touch a forelock when the local squire drives past and it is a change for the better.

Those who steep themselves in issues of social stratification or matters of social “Status” and still believe there needs to be a “struggle-against-class-and-social-oppression” are, more often than not, simply looking for an excuse to justify their own short comings.

AnSymeonakis “The Factors Contributing to Inequality in Australian Society”

Really come down to matters of ability, risk taking and work ethic.

The stupid, security-paralysed and idle will never achieve as much as the able, entrepreneurial and industrious,

And even if the wealth of the nation was evenly redistributed, within 7 years the previously rich would again be rich and the previous impoverished would again be broke.

blanket statements should be avoided col...quote<<<...And even if the wealth of the nation was evenly redistributed, within 7 years the previously rich would again be rich and the previous impoverished would again be broke.>>> that might seem logical but it demands proof

as many have realised the fall to the bottum...means more that mere wealth...the ritch by and large have developed by oppertuinistic advantage..their credit makes it possable to do the vile they do...sans asset[thus sans credit]i doudt that many could even survive]let alone rebuild...your forgetting the top dont really have that much in the way of true skills[its mainly their connections that retains their postition]

the old school tie only carries weight..because there are still old boys in power...remove that little advantage and these elites with the cash for private education/travel/perversion and coruption etc ...fall subject the the norms of the impoverished lower classes[poor education poor healthy facility]

there is no doudt that many would find their skills not up to recreating their lost trust funds

“Despite a common set of parents, I observed criticisms of belonging to a particular “Class” between two of my uncles…. One was class conscious (actually my favourite uncle), he was a lifelong larrikin and was a ships stoker in WWII and worked later as a ship yard labourer and his (more studious) brother, was a RAF test pilot in WWII and later ran a multinational company and did not give any credence to anyone’s “class” but more to their merit as an individual.”

So in your Uncles case Col one did work harder to get where he got while the other maybe had more fun? In what way was your favorite one class conscious?

I saw a similar thing with my Uncles, had 4 of them on my father’s side, him and two uncles were not left land by my grandfather. 2 farmers and 3 that had no choice but to move to the city and work... the 2 farmers looked down on the city dwellers.

Was this “class” at work?

“The world has changed, we no longer touch a forelock when the local squire drives past and it is a change for the better.”

But I have experienced other things. I’m not very flashy, not practical when often dealing with young goobing everywhere children...

I go in to a say a furniture shop and if I am lucky an assistant will come and ask me if they can help, I’ll say what I am after and every time I get escorted to the “budget” section. One occasion I said “oh I like that one” and been told to my face “oh but that is expensive”.

It happens often to me so I guess I’m quite conscious of it

The Pied Piper
Thank you my good friend, you are even better than I thought.

those origination in the higher classes tend to obtain the highest level of economic rewards, even when educational level and field are controlled. Economic inequality is greatest when a broad income measure s used that includes various forms of income. Those who originate in the economic sector of the higher classes tend to have the highest level of rewards.
http://esr.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/17/3/209

Social class 'defines school achievement'
While Britain is the fourth richest country in the world, when it comes to educational achievement social class is still the strongest indicator of success,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2003/apr/23/schools.uk5

Class Power: This refers to unequal access to resources. If you have access to something that someone else needs, that can make you more powerful than the person in need. The person with the resource thus has bargaining power over the other.
http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Social_status#encyclopedia

Class is still a powerful force in American life. Over the past three decades, it has come to play a greater, not lesser, role in important ways.
..it appears that while it is easier for a few high achievers to scale the summits of wealth, for many others it has become harder to move up from one economic class to another. Americans are arguably more likely than they were 30 years ago to end up in the class into which they were born.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/15/national/class/OVERVIEW-FINAL.html?_r=1

Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

Col Rouge,
"AnSymeonakis “The Factors Contributing to Inequality in Australian Society”
Really come down to matters of ability, risk taking and work ethic"
If you are not a top class racisist then you have no idea from auastralian reality, at least in relation with me personaly, I can give you many proofs and evidents even in writing, including a notice from a liberal officer!
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

Some might suggest the reason the very concept of class exists is because many people tend to be 'naturally' discriminatory and prejudiced.
For instance, some people might automatically put "The stupid, security-paralysed and idle" into a class of their own.
Such people would automatically assume that a poor person must be stupid, and anyone who would want to breed with such a person would have to be equally stupid, and so their children would turn out to be stupid, and therefore a decent education would be wasted on them.

“For instance, some people might automatically put "The stupid, security-paralysed and idle" into a class of their own.”

This would be the Old Money Family?

“Such people would automatically assume that a poor person must be stupid, and anyone who would want to breed with such a person would have to be equally stupid, and so their children would turn out to be stupid, and therefore a decent education would be wasted on them.”

Ahh yes private schooling...wonder if these thoughts are on a concious level or imbedded in their DNA.

Thank you Antonios, I am unsure of what I did to deserve such praise

>>“For instance, some people might automatically put "The stupid, security-paralysed and idle" into a class of their own.”

This would be the Old Money Family?<<

Sounds like the upper reaches of the Public Service to me where the Peter Principle reigns supreme.

Underonegod “as many have realised the fall to the bottum...means more that mere wealth...the ritch by and large have developed by oppertuinistic advantage..their credit makes it possable to do the vile they do...sans asset[thus sans credit]i doudt that many could even survive]let alone rebuild...”
Several points
1 I suggest you re-read my previous posts and acknowledge I did make a direct reference to “Maslow” and the obvious significance of that reference to the qualification of “Wealth”
2 your opening comment “blanket statements should be avoided col” would illustrate your own capacity for hypocrisy when I read your words “the ritch by and large”….
3 I never knew wealth was a recipe for vileness… I know quite a few vile folk who I would never characterize or Classify as “rich” who are completely vile… the newspapers are full of them.. the dole bludgers and sneak thieves, tax avoiders and the small mean-minded hypocrites of life...

(btw I do not usually say anything but I would seriously suggest you work with a spell-checker )

4 “doubt that many could even survive let alone rebuild”

Who on earth do you suppose built and maintain the businesses and commerce upon which the Australian social fabric depends and which you seem to think simply exists without care and management?

Like I said previously, when 1/3 of Australia’s millionaires are first generation migrants, you can see them as self-made men and women. I know several who have built businesses and when some have maybe seen their business lost they do not lose the capacity and energy to build it again.. your assertion fails.

Pied Piper “So in your Uncles case Col one did work harder to get where he got while the other maybe had more fun? In what way was your favorite one class conscious?”

By making a big issue of it at a family wedding

Re your own illustration…. Anyone who needs to look down at anyone else has a problem, better to accept everyone as a peer and individual than pretend anyone is inherently better than the other.

Pied Piper… re furniture salesmen … similar to you, I was buying an engagement ring recently and was asked by the jeweler what my budget was.. embarrassing when the lady who will wear it was standing there too.. fortunately I chose a number which was high enough for her to be wearing it now.
The same thing happened when I bought a house a few years back.. I was asked what my budget was.. I told them I would decide when I had seen what they had to offer… sometimes not declaring an amount can work wonders :- )

AnSymeonakis “If you are not a top class racisist then you have no idea from auastralian reality, at least in relation with me personaly, I can give you many proofs and evidents even in writing, including a notice from a liberal officer!”
I am at a loss to understand what that little outburst is all about… nothing I said alluded to any “racist” undertones, let alone overt statements and none of it was “personal”.. I am inclined to do a Pauline Hanson

“Please Explain?”

“Pied Piper… re furniture salesmen … similar to you, I was buying an engagement ring recently and was asked by the jeweler what my budget was.. embarrassing when the lady who will wear it was standing there too.. fortunately I chose a number which was high enough for her to be wearing it now.”

Well done that man and congratulations.

A friend of mine got married recently in Scotland and I watched it over the internet, was a brilliant use of technology.

“The same thing happened when I bought a house a few years back.. I was asked what my budget was.. I told them I would decide when I had seen what they had to offer… sometimes not declaring an amount can work wonders :- )”

In my experience I’d say the same as you and they’d take me to a cardboard box under a bridge somewhere.[smile]

Pied Piper "Well done that man and congratulations."

Thankyou, PP. She got a diamond on her finger.. and I got a diamond (of a lady) on my arm.

My younger daughter got married last year and we used the interent to distribute the 400 pictures taken of her day to relatives around the world.. you are right it is a great medium for that sort of application. Similarly my "diamond" is in USA at present.. skype provides a cheap solution for video/audio communication.

To housing... yes but depending on what it costs, if you can rent the cardboard box out for $50 a week it might still be a good investment.

“She got a diamond on her finger.. and I got a diamond (of a lady) on my arm.”

So cool Col, are you going to have a big wedding or more subdued type event? I am truly trying to restrain myself from asking a ton of questions.

I don’t understand skype yet – my parents keep telling me to use it though.

“To housing... yes but depending on what it costs, if you can rent the cardboard box out for $50 a week it might still be a good investment.”

Well yeah, if you added a tarp over it you’d get top dollar. I logged in to a “homeless” site recently – just because I found the concept pretty bizarre, there wasn’t many messages.

And I bought some makeup today; the lady goes “Did you choose a brush for it?” and I go “this one” holding it up for her to see, she replies “oh good that is one of the cheaper ones”.

Tomorrow I'm going down there with a tin cup and I'm just going to stand around making money all day.

These are deep waters you find yourself in, E Knox. I haven't read all of the foregoing but I'm sure there's good advice in there. Has anyone mentioned the words "hegemony" or “bourgeois”? Our society is arguably in stasis due to these. You might want to read Fredric Jameson’s essay “Postmodernism and Consumer Society” if you want to jump in the deep end. It talks of a culture that has no history and no trajectory. The notion of “class” is also anachronistic as far as any subtlety is concerned. Wealth is now the sole determinant of class. If an ignorant person garners sufficient wealth he may purchase the semblance of a higher station in life. This is where the concept of the bourgeois class comes in handy; the bourgeoisie today comprises virtually all society; that is, those who have garnered sufficient wealth or trappings to assert their ascendant status, and those who are as yet merely aspirational. There is a cohort of scum out there who refuse to play the game, and there are those who possess only “cultural capital” (another good levelling concept), but these have a hard time competing with opinionated philistines with big houses, three cars and a boat. Society doesn’t “function” or “change” in any meaningful way. Values come in and out of fashion and are commodified accordingly, that is all. Macro change is pegged to the ebb and flow of the economy; and micro change (micro indeed) is the illusory by-product of patronage. In short, human culture has devolved into pure economics.

Pied Piper thank you for asking.. it will be low key about 20 people, this being my third and her second marriage…. in the reception centre we usually go dancing.

All our children (we have 2 each) will be there and each of our eldest children will be the witnesses.

If you pass your email address through Graham Young he will pass it to me and I will be happy to send you some pics or answer questions

Skype is good.. although I find it suffers if windows explorer is running (some incompatibility) so I just shut IE down and dedicate the PC to skype audio and video… oh the other things… the image you receive is often crude because it depends on how good a camera the other person is using and the sound quality can suffer from cheap microphones etc.

Squeers.. what an analytically bland existence you must have..

It is a good job humanity is based on free choice and diversity.

An entire population of folk all reflecting you’re your less-than-rosy outlook would likely decide suicide, before having children, was the only reasonable solution.

On the contrary, Col, my life is analytically and philosophically rich … but not naïve. Nor was suicide something I ever entertained the notion of, not before or since my six happy children were born—the last two are seven months old now and delightful. I am only cynical about our society (and the plight of the world) under capitalism. Master Knox was asking about society, was he not, and I thought a touch or realism was called for—and of course if he scratches beneath superficial conventions he might get better marks? There is a vast body of literature to back up my précis btw, that makes a mockery of the kind of Panglossian world view you of which you appear to be enamoured.
Of course if you want to discuss humanity’s being “based on free choice and diversity” (extraordinary fantasy!), that pendulous bubble might also be easily burst. Which is not to say that I deny the possibility outright, but that these free determinists are rare plants indeed, hardly “diverse”, and certainly not to be found among those (such as yourself?) who credulously subscribe to libertarian delusions.

“…my six happy children were born—the last two are seven months old now and delightful.”

My goodness. We must start talking straight away. Ages, genders (Identical twins?)… how do you keep them all busy? How do you reduce being too busy yourself? Casual household or firm with flexible rules?

Ummm… values you teach them, can one plan if their children will be a “have” or a “have not”? Beyond education but values enforced in the home.

Squeers “Which is not to say that I deny the possibility outright, but that these free determinists are rare plants indeed, hardly “diverse”, and certainly not to be found among those (such as yourself?) who credulously subscribe to libertarian delusions.”

Please yourself Squeers…. You are free to hold and express a view under the libertarian values I subscribe to… but the delusion is all yours. You see, your delusions just don’t matter to a libertarian like me….

All I know is from, what you wrote (which seems pretty boring and pointless) compared to what I know of my own life, I would not swap with you under any circumstances.

Better bourgiose than the rabble on the barracades… who got sucked into the revolutionary lie, I do believe even Robespierre got his in the end

I quite understand your boredom, Col, perfectly alright. I blame myself. One should not cast pearls before swine after all. :-)