The term underclasscombines so many different meanings that social scientists must use it withextreme care.
“White underclass”is a term I’ve used often in my writing, and most American readers seem to knowwhat I mean. They’ve got eyes and live in the same nation I do. But in a suddenburst of journalistic responsibility, I decided that if I am going to throwaround the word underclass, then I should offer some clearer, perhaps morescientific definition.
So I startedwriting this with a pile of published research papers before me. Now they arein the trash can by my side. Looking down on them, I can see the gobbledygooktitles, the stuff of which government policy and political platforms are made.They run together in slurry of the language of our society’s commissars:Concerning-Prevalence-Growth-and-Dynamics-Concentrated Urban PovertyAreas- block-level vs. tract-level segregation-800-tract-tables-urbanabstracts-Defining-and-Measuring-the-Underclass-from-The Journal ofPolicy Analysis and Management-s tatistical-summary-of “-
What I findis that nobody in social science seems to agree on the term, or, being firmlyplaced in the true white middle class themselves, even agree if such a thing asa white underclass exists. You can’t smell the rabble from the putting green.To others, some blacks for example, the term white underclass is an oxymoron,or maybe yet another new white social code word to be deciphered. I can’t blamethem for their wariness. You have to be an American to get even these codewords. For instance, for all practical purposes and to most Americans,regardless of race, the term “middle class” means “white.” Plain and simple. Weall know that, even members of the “black middle class.”
Middle classalso has implications of people’s occupations, usually white collaroccupations, though it also includes some of the ever thinning ranks ofblue-collar workers.- But this comes down to describing human beingssolely in terms of their jobs in the capitalist labor marketplace, andassumptions about income and whether one takes their daily shower before theygo to work or after they come home. By that definition, anyone of working agewho doesn’t have a steady job of the right ty pe, for whatever reason, is insome sort of “economic underclass.” In other words, they are the people thatmiddle class folks feel should damned well be working, if they are over age 18and have a pulse. (“If I gotta do time in this meaningless workhouse of anation, you do too!”)- This underclass includes any people of color seenon the street at midday during the week, single mothers, and paraplegics too,now that the middle class is paying taxes for handicap parking spaces andwheelchair access to the public shitters.
Another waywe define underclass is as “losers.” People who cannot talk, think, or act likemiddle class professional and managerial workers, people who cannot even beposers. There is absolutely no excuse for these people. We’ve got television24/7 to show’em how to behave. They could learn to act like the blue collarworkers we see on the endless reruns of The King of Queens (an American sitcomabout a parcel service delivery truck driver.). They could at least be funnyand amiable fer godz sake.