When I began reading Marx and Engels “Communist Manifesto” I
expected to be bored with an extensive shpeel about how great Stalin was, or
something along those lines. However, after reading it I was intrigued by some of
the ideas the document presented and how they related to my life.
For
starters, in literally the first line “all of history” is described as the
“history of all class struggles.” Based on what I have learned in my past
history classes, this does seem to be pretty true. According to Communist Manifesto,
there were two main classes, the bourgeoisie, or the capitalist, rich people,
and the proletarians, or the poor, working class people. It is the interactions
and struggled between the two that cause conflicts in society. Though I don’t
think the class system is quite so black and white, this idea did get me
thinking about how class systems exists in today’s society.
One of my favorite T.V. shows is Sex and the
City, which I’m sure almost everyone has heard of. It’s based on the lives of 4
women living in New York City, and how they navigate through the ever-changing
Manhattan social scene. In this clip from YouTube, they discuss the class system at work in
their lives.
This did resonate with me somewhat because I do still think
a class system exists even on a small scale, such as within a school, that definitely creates
a pretty distinct division between who has money, and who doesn’t.
 |
| The preferred coat of Students, courtesy of thenorthface.com |
For girls, a class system is often apparent through fashion. The city I grew up in was
relatively wealthy, and often times it was the girls with the expensive stuff
that were deemed “popular,” which of course led everyone, even those who
couldn’t afford it, to want these expensive things. In middle school, it was Ugg Boots. Having them immediately made you cooler, especially because they were
expensive. In high school, the coveted items switched to even more luxurious
things like Pandora bracelets and Tori Burch sandals. And at the University of
Michigan, pricier labels like North Face (i.e. the black, knee length coat that it seems almost every U of M girl has) Madewell, Club Monoco, and BCBG are almost everywhere. These labels represent wealth, something that is divider of classes whether on a college campus or in the real world.
 |
| The Apple Symbol courtesy of forbes.com |
In an example that any U of M student can understand, Apple computers are everywhere. Just look around in your lectures; that little, white apple is glowing from probably 2 out of 3 computers. I will admit, I do own my fair share of Apple products, including the laptop I'm currently typing on. In my experience Mac users tend to have what I like to call the "Mac Complex" though, the belief that Apple products are superior to all else, and basically make you look cool and accepted. I will admit, I do secretly judge people without Macs, wondering why they didn't just jump on the bandwagon like anyone else, sometimes even wondering if they maybe they couldn't afford one. Doesn't this make even me guilty of creating a wrongful division of classes between those with Macs and those without?
Though things like North Face Jackets and Apple computers are trivial signs of wealth, and therefore status, they still do create some division whether we notice it or not. Even if it's not as dramatic or prevalent as the division between the bourgeoise and the proletarians, social classes do still exist, even on this small scale.
Elyssa,
ReplyDeleteI must say I agree with your post. Student's definitely distinguish a division of class within their school by observing the brand labels of each individual's items. As awful as it is, these infamous labels somehow places people on a higher pedestal than the individuals who don't flash their belongings around. Additionally, like you said, we tend to class the ones with brand names as those who are wealthy. Therefore, in Marx's terms, these people would be considered the bourgeoisie. They are the ones who flash around their high fashion belongings while the kids without are forced to see them enjoying their expensive products. However, sometimes the individuals who do not have the label stuff are the ones who insult these so-called "popular" products. I'm not saying this always applies, however, I have witnessed some kids say "apple sucks" or "north faces don't keep you warm." Nonetheless, these individuals may just be nonconformist regardless of their class status. However, we can easily relate this division to Marx. Like Marx had proposed in his article, there is a class antagonism that exists amongst those who supposedly have and those who don't.
The kids with the brand label belongings tend to overly accessorize as if owning these products makes them better than others. Additionally, these type of individuals seem to flash these things in the faces of those who do not appear to have them, too. In response, some of the people who do not own these products are the ones who talk poorly of them. They do not think these things are any better than the ones they own. Therefore, they are partially insulting those who do have an apple laptop and north face coats. Evidently, a class antagonism exists between these two sets of people (similar to Marx idea between the bourgeoisie and the proletariats).
Although many people may not agree with me, I believe this post captures an aspect of life as a tween/teen that typically exists in most schools. I am not claiming that all people act this way in relation to their class status, however, I do believe that this division according to personal belongings is typical amongst kids.
Good job, Elyssa!
I must admit first and foremost that I am an owner of multiple Northface jackets and Ugg boots. I don't own a pair of Hunters, so maybe I haven't fully conformed, but nonetheless that's not the point. I think that people overthink the labels on clothes altogether. I am a bargain hunter. I've been a coupon clipper and the girl that holds out until the sale for as long as I can remember. I also am by no means "rich" in comparison to some of the wealth here at the University of Michigan. I also think that people make too many assumptions off materialistic items. I know many students here on full or partial scholarship that own many more designer items than myself. I also know many students who are extremely wealthy but choose to not sport name brands because they choose to not conform.
ReplyDeleteWhile I do see the general point you are trying to make, I must advocate for myself in the fact that I don't think about the name brands as a symbol of anything. I think I "conform" mostly because I don't really care what I'm wearing and it's much easier for me to "follow the rest of people" instead of going out of my way to be different. My mother does my shopping for me quite a bit of the time and to have her go out of her way to be different would simply be more difficult than it's worth. I think that we must think about the way someone portrays him/herself first and foremost before we portray them by what they are wearing because in fact, you'll find that stuck up or wealthy doesn't necessarily match their persona.
I recognize that you did not mean to make this post in any way offensive and simply used it as a comparison but I couldn't help but comment and advocate after reading. I, myself, am skeptical of wearing my name brands because of this idea and I've just become hopeful that people will be able to look past the assumptions that come with name brand items.
Elyssa,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you to an extent, that certain brand names might be seen as a way to create a class division. However as Sarah said, sometimes people who don't own those brands don't because they don't like the products or because they believe the products they own are better. For example take the iPhone. A lot of my friends think I weird because I don't have an iPhone, and because I don't want one. Does it create a class division? No not really, but it does separate people. Now this might be something that is more prevalent among girls -- and I'm not trying to be sexist here -- but the majority of guys don't really care about brands in my opinion. I think the reason most people end up owning the same brand, even if it might be expensive, is because those the are most readily available brands. To go out of your way to find a warm fleece that isn't a North Face would be too much effort, and the likelihood of finding a similar quality fleece/jacket for a lower price is going to be low. The fact is most people own North Faces or Uggs or Timberlands because they are the mostly readily available brands for the product and find others of similar quality is sometimes hard and costs too much effort.
I agree with your stance on fashion as a means of popularity, status, and distinction of class. Many fashionable items are thought to make people "cool" or "appear rich". From a male perspective, at the University there are items such as sperry, patagonia, north face, ray ban, and polo ralph lauren that when worn, people think that you are a part of the upper class or are popular. Although, I may have a set of ray bans and sperrys, I don't consider myself automatically "cool" because of this. I agree that these products seem to make a distinction between classes.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I don't agree that Apple products correlate with status. I own a mac, iPod, iPhone, iPad mini, and have shares in Apple stock. I don't think that these things automatically give me the title as cool. I chose these products because of they are dependable. I feel that there is no other company out there that is as professional and dependable as Apple.
This relates to "Communist Manifesto" in numerous ways. Marx and Engels argue that there are class distinctions based on the product industry. And I have to agree, the products that I listed at the beginning do create a distinction in our society. Also, this industrial society leads people to believe that if they don't have these products, they are experiencing some kind of struggle. You do make a good point, society is becoming judgmental on what products people have.