Why do people from privileged class backgrounds often misidentify their origins as working class?

[nogojones]

Interesting read here, more than just a book review

Book Review: Dan Evans “A Nation of Shopkeepers: The unstoppable rise of the petty bourgeoisie” (2023) - Industrial Workers of the World (IWW)

A review of Dan Evans' latest book about the middle class in the UK, and how the One Big Union can build class alliances to build a better world.

iww.org.uk

I think the reviewer Bruce is a mate of Dan so he may have gone in a bit easy. I just finished the book and put a brief review here but I'm a bit soft on him as well.

the strictly come reading 2023 reading challenge thread

1/59 The Rooster Bar - John Grisham 2/59 The White Album - Joan Didion 3/59 Storm Watch - CJ Box 4/59 Oath of Loyalty - Kyle Mills 5/59 SAS : Rogue Heroes - Ben Macintyre

www.urban75.net

 

[ska invita]

I think the reviewer Bruce is a mate of Dan so he may have gone in a bit easy. I just finished the book and put a brief review here but I'm a bit soft on him as well.

the strictly come reading 2023 reading challenge thread

1/59 The Rooster Bar - John Grisham 2/59 The White Album - Joan Didion 3/59 Storm Watch - CJ Box 4/59 Oath of Loyalty - Kyle Mills 5/59 SAS : Rogue Heroes - Ben Macintyre

www.urban75.net

great that youve read it as i'd like to talk more about it with someone.
am copying in your review here
----
nogo:
I'm probably a bit easier on this than if it were written by anyone other than Dan Evans a I have a bit of a soft spot for him. To my mind he hugely overstates who's in the PMC and petite-bourgeoisie. He's really salty that he hasn't bought a house and his degree means he ended up not in a choice academic career, but working in the usual minimum wage jobs that everyone else has to do.

He redeems himself in the conclusion, having a go at the sections of the liberal left whose identity is protest and those building a nice media career off it, and looks to build a movement led by the working class, well outside the Labour Party and the stagnant bureaucracy of most of the trade unions, dragging the petite-bourgeoisie along with it and away from reaction.

It chimes with what a mate said about the book. He likened it to marking a maths test where you look at all the working out the student has done and it's wrong all the way through, but somehow manages to get the right answer at the end.
-------------------
A rattled off response to that from me is:

-its very good that he has been upfront about his class position, frustrations and motivations. No doubt these have been genuinely formative in his world view and inspired him to write the book, but however resentful he is or not, I don't see this in any way a bad thing for the book. Some people will feel 'called out' by this book and he is being honest that he is archetypal New PB . The thing about class is that it positions everyone, and an important part of talking about class is everyone being honest, primarily with themselves but also others, about that position.

Regarding who he says is in the PMC and Old PB and New PB, I dont think its unfair to say that he is taking his lead directly from others: Barbara Ehrenreich for the PMC and Nicos Poulantzas for the new and old PBs. I dont see a problem with either definition.

In 2011 Ehrenreich identified a split in the PMC, whereby some parts are now falling down the class ladder (nurses and teachers), whilst others retain old privileges.

Old PB definition seems pretty uncontentious regarding trades. Solo traders are identified as a massive new growth area.

New PB is trickier. My understanding is its graduates forced into the working class, but who will likely rise up eventually over time.
There's also those working class people pushed into self employment by the state.

That there is a blur of movement and position here is part of the analysis...the crucial thing is the above are not within the traditional working class category, and I broadly agree with that - I think it is very useful to be more precise about class positions, trajectories and alliances,

The book also challenges the broad cultural absence of talking about Old PB political outlooks. A massive oversite, and so many parts of the Old PB get treated as working class by everyone, including class conscious leftists.

I dont think I agree with "all the working out the student has done and it's wrong all the way through, but somehow manages to get the right answer at the end." Maybe you can explain what is so wrong and what is so right in a bit more detail?

The working out looks good to me, and in fact I balked slightly at the final chapter diatribe, and its dig at identity politics in particular. Class analysis must accommodate an intersectional element

 

[LDC]

He (author of Nation of Shopkeepers) is speaking at a bunch of events that Housman's Bookshop are putting on.

Upcoming Events – Housmans Bookshop

housmans.com

 

[nogojones]

-its very good that he has been upfront about his class position, frustrations and motivations. No doubt these have been genuinely formative in his world view and inspired him to write the book, but however resentful he is or not, I don't see this in any way a bad thing for the book. Some people will feel 'called out' by this book and he is being honest that he is archetypal New PB . The thing about class is that it positions everyone, and an important part of talking about class is everyone being honest, primarily with themselves but also others, about that position.

I was being a bit flippant about his own position and I'm cool with it. But even though he came from a middle class family, with a good education and "cultural capital", he's still ended up working in the same jobs we all do. So I think whilst he feels PMC or whatever, he's really just another low paid worker, working in the third sector, trying to sweep the worst excesses of neo-liberalism under the carpet and to keep the streets as clear as possible of the homeless who get in the way of a nice shopping experience for consumers. Though he's not directly producing goods, for a capitalist, he is servicing capital and insuring it can get the highest returns.

Maybe this book will make him famous and he can become upwardly mobile again and I don't want to crush any aspiration there, but lets be honest, things ain't looking good in terms of upward mobility for the vast bulk of people going forward.

Regarding who he says is in the PMC and Old PB and New PB, I dont think its unfair to say that he is taking his lead directly from others: Barbara Ehrenreich for the PMC and Nicos Poulantzas for the new and old PBs. I dont see a problem with either definition.

I do take issue with Poulantzas (though I've not read his work directly). I think he has far too broad a definition for the PB and the way it seemed to be used in the 70s/80's was to step away from seeing the WC as the main potential driving force of change. As for Ehrenreich, I have a bit more time for her analysis, the PMC is a spectrum (as is the PB) and vast swathes have been proletarianized, but I see it as above, whilst teachers or nurses ain't producing goods/services directly for capital - though the privatisation of these services may be changing that, they are essential to capital as a whole by making sure labour is fit for purpose. The state may take this role on, but they do it in the interest of capital. Maybe many years ago teachers, nurses or whoever felt they had some skin in the game, but those days seem long past. However I think there is also something in her work about the role in some of these jobs in the disciplining of labour and the degree of power some have can make them very isolated from the WC as a whole.

New PB is trickier. My understanding is its graduates forced into the working class, but who will likely rise up eventually over time.

You mean rise up in terms of career? or rise up with a big cob on?

If it's the first, then I think they may be a bit optimistic. Off the top of my head something like 35-40% of kids now go on to higher education. I'd wager the majority of them ain't really going to be going onto greater things, they'll just be working in mediocre jobs, slowly paying off debt they'll never clear, as the student financing people/gvt move the goalposts to maximise their returns.

There's also those working class people pushed into self employment by the state.

OK, I find this trickier as well. I personally fall into this category at the moment and whilst I'm now not beholden to a boss, I'm also earning less than at any time since I was a teenager. Once again there's a spectrum here and whilst some may thrive I think an awful lot more will be in my boat. Personally I'd always like to think I'd always side with workers struggles, others in this position may not. They might see strikes of transport worker or whoever as impacting on their ability to earn and take a reactionary position. But this is where I think the book is good in the conclusion. That by building power based in the working class we're more likely to be able to carry these people along with us.

FFS. I hate writing long posts. I'll likely have to come back and correct all the pony spellin and grammar.

 

[ska invita]

So I think whilst he feels PMC or whatever, he's really just another low paid worker, working in the third sector, trying to sweep the worst excesses of neo-liberalism under the carpet and to keep the streets as clear as possible of the homeless who get in the way of a nice shopping experience for consumers. Though he's not directly producing goods, for a capitalist, he is servicing capital and insuring it can get the highest returns.

Yes, but any managerial position is not just about wages its about power over others. For example he talks about how even at low paid workplaces, lets say Wetherspoons, there are about 4 layers of managerial positions within the staff, not getting paid a huge amount more at all, but fragmenting staff solidarity nonetheless. He brings up how the number of managerial positions have gone from (IIRC) something like 5% of workers in the not too distant past to over 15% now. New census results might show a further increase.

These kind of observations are not killer blows to say 'See! Workers revolution is impossible!', its about being analytical about how we are stratified by work, and how new hurdles are erected to stop unity, and why calling your newspaper Workers Hammer might not be landing with all the small-time managers out there,

I've forgotten his current job and class position, but the bit that stuck with me was him saying, I'm a Corbynite New PB and thats why I can talk about it unflinchingly and not come across as if I'm attacking other New PBs

 

[ska invita]

OK, I find this trickier as well. I personally fall into this category at the moment and whilst I'm now not beholden to a boss, I'm also earning less than at any time since I was a teenager. Once again there's a spectrum here and whilst some may thrive I think an awful lot more will be in my boat. Personally I'd always like to think I'd always side with workers struggles, others in this position may not. They might see strikes of transport worker or whoever as impacting on their ability to earn and take a reactionary position. But this is where I think the book is good in the conclusion. That by building power based in the working class we're more likely to be able to carry these people along with us.

Yes its a crucial point, you may well be earning less and be more precarious in the PB than in a salaried WC job. But the point is that your worldview potentially changes as a result. (also why some PB will look at striking workers and see them striking over higher wages than they get and will not support - its been great to see the opposite of that trend in the last strike wave)

A good example I didnt click with at first is lockdowns, and the PB slippery path of them..... Lockdowns are bad because they are stopping me from earning. Furlough (if applicable) isn't enough. By enforcing lockdowns the Big State is bad, it is interfering in my life. I have an independence of spirit that I value. I hate bosses and I don't have one. The state interferes, taxes me, gives me endless self-employed hoops to jump through (bureaucracy).
Then the slippery slope that The State = Socialism, the State annoys me therefor I dont trust Socialism or Socialists.

 

[ska invita]

I do take issue with Poulantzas (though I've not read his work directly). I think he has far too broad a definition for the PB and the way it seemed to be used in the 70s/80's was to step away from seeing the WC as the main potential driving force of change. As for Ehrenreich, I have a bit more time for her analysis, the PMC is a spectrum (as is the PB) and vast swathes have been proletarianized, but I see it as above, whilst teachers or nurses ain't producing goods/services directly for capital - though the privatisation of these services may be changing that, they are essential to capital as a whole by making sure labour is fit for purpose. The state may take this role on, but they do it in the interest of capital. Maybe many years ago teachers, nurses or whoever felt they had some skin in the game, but those days seem long past. However I think there is also something in her work about the role in some of these jobs in the disciplining of labour and the degree of power some have can make them very isolated from the WC as a whole.

I've had a vain attempt to read Poulantzas (too hard) and also Gorz's Farewell To The Working Class (also too hard). Who are these people who can read books like this , I marvel at it. Anyhow, I am vaguely aware of summaries of their work and that they were both vilified by orthodox marxists for daring to say that, perhaps there was a fundamental problem with the notion that the working class is in a position to overthrow the capitalist elite, and that the world of work has vastly changed since Marx and that political allegiances and thoughts of workers are infinitely more divided and shattered than we would like. Substrata class positions can help explain all this.

To me this seems undisputable if you live in the UK and actually talk to different people across the class spectrum, across regions, etc. This is why I rate this book, its bringing these distinctions into focus. its trying to describe them accurately. None of it means class unchangeably determines political outlook, but why people dont align with the left desperately needs understating.

 

[nogojones]

Yes, but any managerial position is not just about wages its about power over others. For example he talks about how even at low paid workplaces, lets say Wetherspoons, there are about 4 layers of managerial positions within the staff, not getting paid a huge amount more at all, but fragmenting staff solidarity nonetheless. He brings up how the number of managerial positions have gone from (IIRC) something like 5% of workers in the not too distant past to over 15% now. New census results might show a further increase.

These kind of observations are not killer blows to say 'See! Workers revolution is impossible!', its about being analytical about how we are stratified by work, and how new hurdles are erected to stop unity, and why calling your newspaper Workers Hammer might not be landing with all the small-time managers out there,

I've forgotten his current job and class position, but the bit that stuck with me was him saying, I'm a Corbynite New PB and thats why I can talk about it unflinchingly and not come across as if I'm attacking other New PBs

He may have got that leg up now and be working in the uni, but 'til fairly recently I think he was like a homelessness support worker.

 

[LDC]

Long and very interesting Novara interview with Dan Evans, author of A Nation of Shopkeepers

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Long and very interesting Novara interview with Dan Evans, author of A Nation of Shopkeepers

X1 This is excellent. Don’t agree with Evans on all of the points he makes but his analysis of the downwardly mobile petit bourgeois is compelling.

 

[ska invita]

Long and very interesting Novara interview with Dan Evans, author of A Nation of Shopkeepers

a brilliant conversation IMO - a must listen.

 

[LDC]

He has some good reflections on Just Stop Oil and the culture of left wing activism towards the end.

 

[Fozzie Bear]

Yes I thought that Novara show was good too. His experiences in South Wales are similar to mine with family in North Wales.

 

[ska invita]

My life experience was first ten years growing up on inner city estates (lumpen, WC), moving to very petty b suburbs after that, then myself becoming a downwardly mobile new petty b (in Dan Evans terns) graduate , rubbing up against proper middle class people along the way.

To bring it back to the thread topic, those 4 categories did and do all feel like meaningfully different categories even though there's massive overlap of people who would consider themselves working class within all 4.

The trick is to find the commonalities between the first 3 (with PMC needing no direct appeal), and communicate in a way that brings the three together. Old fashioned communist style workers hammer type stuff just doesn't do that...I dont think SWP type messaging does either

I think Dan's point about libertarianism and even classic liberal appeals to freedom of speech etc are a good start. There must be others.

The left has in real terms ceded any anti-globalisation theory to the right also...
Comes up in the conversation but also the anti-democracy of the EU was very common on the left (with Tony Benn a bit of a figurehead for that).

 

[Tanya1982]

My life experience was first ten years growing up on inner city estates (lumpen, WC), moving to very petty b suburbs after that, then myself becoming a downwardly mobile new petty b (in Dan Evans terns) graduate , rubbing up against proper middle class people along the way.

To bring it back to the thread topic, those 4 categories did and do all feel like meaningfully different categories even though there's massive overlap of people who would consider themselves working class within all 4.

The trick is to find the commonalities between the first 3 (with PMC needing no direct appeal), and communicate in a way that brings the three together. Old fashioned communist style workers hammer type stuff just doesn't do that...I dont think SWP type messaging does either

I think Dan's point about libertarianism and even classic liberal appeals to freedom of speech etc are a good start. There must be others.

The left has in real terms ceded any anti-globalisation theory to the right also...
Comes up in the conversation but also the anti-democracy of the EU was very common on the left (with Tony Benn a bit of a figurehead for that).

You have to appeal to joy. Everything successful appeals to that, even if it’s just the right wing populist joy of wrecking stuff and taking things from others, it relies on that. You can’t sell a slog to many people. It’s a very particular few (and I’m not generally one of them), on any side of all angles, who want a challenging time or a struggle that never ends. You can try, many have and will, but not enough people ever buy into it, whatever it is. And the fourth category that you exclude needs to be included. Exclusivity of any type is only appealing up to a point. Once it tips into righteous purity, you’re done.

 

[Brainaddict]

You have to appeal to joy. Everything successful appeals to that, even if it’s just the right wing populist joy of wrecking stuff and taking things from others, it relies on that. You can’t sell a slog to many people. It’s a very particular few (and I’m not generally one of them), on any side of all angles, who want a challenging time or a struggle that never ends. You can try, many have and will, but not enough people ever buy into it, whatever it is. And the fourth category that you exclude needs to be included. Exclusivity of any type is only appealing up to a point. Once it tips into righteous purity, you’re done.

I agree with you on appealing to joy rather than trying to sell people on a hard slog.

But on including the genuine middle class people, that is difficult because they are so comfortable. They have really good lives, materially speaking. It's hard to convince them of the need for change. I don't think middle class people should be pushed out of movements though - a few people will always act against their own interests for the greater good and they should be encouraged.

 

[[62]]

I too thought it was a really interesting interview.

Growing up in Torbay, I could relate to Dan's experience of life in Porthcawl. It was only years after I left that I put together the connection with it being quite a conservative place but not middle class in the same manner of the Surrey commuter belt. Many of the population had moved there from industrial areas to open B&Bs and hotels and a large chunk of the rest were builders, plumbers, refrigerator fitters etc. who relied on those hotels, care homes and caravan parks for work. It voted Brexit as a constituency, however unlike Porthcawl, it's in decline like many seaside towns, and personally I think it will revert back to the Lib Dems at the next election.

Didn't agree with all that was said - the stuff about Corbyn in particular - and I think one of the main obstacles they'll have to overcome is that very few people of any political hue are going to want to sit through a two-hour discussion where people talk about the PMC, autodidacts and hegemony.

 

[Elpenor]

I too thought it was a really interesting interview.

Growing up in Torbay, I could relate to Dan's experience of life in Porthcawl. It was only years after I left that I put together the connection with it being quite a conservative place but not middle class in the same manner of the Surrey commuter belt. Many of the population had moved there from industrial areas to open B&Bs and hotels and a large chunk of the rest were builders, plumbers, refrigerator fitters etc. who relied on those hotels, care homes and caravan parks for work. It voted Brexit as a constituency, however unlike Porthcawl, it's in decline like many seaside towns, and personally I think it will revert back to the Lib Dems at the next election.

Didn't agree with all that was said - the stuff about Corbyn in particular - and I think one of the main obstacles they'll have to overcome is that very few people of any political hue are going to want to sit through a two-hour discussion where people talk about the PMC, autodidacts and hegemony.

Think this is quite an interesting perspective on Torbay actually, having spent a few years living nearby now.

 

[[62]]

Think this is quite an interesting perspective on Torbay actually, having spent a few years living nearby now.

Cheers. It took moving 25 miles up the road to a university city for me to notice that the reason why driving down the road into Paignton we used to use to visit some mates was a nightmare was because it was too narrow to accommodate all the electricians and plumbers vans parked on it. Then I thought back to my paper round and delivering The Sun and the News of the World rather than the Times and Telegraph to all these big houses with nice views, the kids at school's parents etc.

It's a weird place. Massive poverty and deprivation as well, yet on a good day you could take a walk along the coast and really think you're in the French Riviera.

 

[Red Sky]

Long and very interesting Novara interview with Dan Evans, author of A Nation of Shopkeepers

Annoying that he wasn't asked about Don't Pay, which arguably (partially) built the alliance he's talking about.

 

[ska invita]

Supposedly a good new book about the PMC... Link includes podcasts theyve done I think

Uncomfortably Off

Uncomfortably Off - Why Inequality Matters for High Earners; Uncomfortably Off reveals that those generally considered to be the most affluent feel anxious about the future and struggle to keep up, or even to stay put., but reducing income inequality will benefit everyone, even those quite near...

policy.bristoluniversitypress.co.uk

60k a year gets you in the top 10pc supposedly

 

[Brainaddict]

From this article about the book Why are Brits on £180k so sad?

A quarter of Britons paid £100,000 or more identify as “working class”

Which brings us back to the initial title of the thread. I really think the left is as responsible for this situation as anyone. Its discussion of class over the years has been crashingly lacking in nuance and as invested in cultural signifiers as anyone else.

Increasingly I think that the ability to acquire assets beyond your house (and sometimes I'm not sure about excluding that) is what makes you middle class, and that includes pensions over and above the state pension.

To then complain that this makes a binman middle class is sloppy thinking. Yes, the ability to sit around for 20+ years at the end of your life enjoying yourself without working moves people towards the middle class in political leanings. Not necessarily very far, compared to owning multiple properties and a share portfolio, but definitely and definitively it does move them in that direction. Does a working class person deserve a good retirement? Yes, absolutely, but it also makes them a bit less working class. It's the obsession with all sorts of identitarian nonsense (even among those who attack identitarian nonsense) that makes this so hard for people to swallow.

Assets change your class position. Fin.

 

[LDC]

Supposedly a good new book about the PMC... Link includes podcasts theyve done I think

Uncomfortably Off

Uncomfortably Off - Why Inequality Matters for High Earners; Uncomfortably Off reveals that those generally considered to be the most affluent feel anxious about the future and struggle to keep up, or even to stay put., but reducing income inequality will benefit everyone, even those quite near...

policy.bristoluniversitypress.co.uk

60k a year gets you in the top 10pc supposedly

Not read the book or listened to the podcasts yet, but sounds a bit like it might be related to Turchin's stuff on elite overproduction as a contributing factor to the instability/collapse of societies.

Elite overproduction - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Peter Turchin

peterturchin.com

There's a journal on the whole wider subject called Cliodynamics but it's on some hold while it gets re-jigged content wise.

Cliodynamics

escholarship.org

 

[Pickman's model]

From this article about the book Why are Brits on £180k so sad?



Which brings us back to the initial title of the thread. I really think the left is as responsible for this situation as anyone. Its discussion of class over the years has been crashingly lacking in nuance and as invested in cultural signifiers as anyone else.

Increasingly I think that the ability to acquire assets beyond your house (and sometimes I'm not sure about excluding that) is what makes you middle class, and that includes pensions over and above the state pension.

To then complain that this makes a binman middle class is sloppy thinking. Yes, the ability to sit around for 20+ years at the end of your life enjoying yourself without working moves people towards the middle class in political leanings. Not necessarily very far, compared to owning multiple properties and a share portfolio, but definitely and definitively it does move them in that direction. Does a working class person deserve a good retirement? Yes, absolutely, but it also makes them a bit less working class. It's the obsession with all sorts of identitarian nonsense (even among those who attack identitarian nonsense) that makes this so hard for people to swallow.

Assets change your class position. Fin.

you're not really in a position to attack anyone for sloppy thinking or crashing lack of nuance with that sort of post

 

[LDC]

Supposedly a good new book about the PMC... Link includes podcasts theyve done I think

Uncomfortably Off

Uncomfortably Off - Why Inequality Matters for High Earners; Uncomfortably Off reveals that those generally considered to be the most affluent feel anxious about the future and struggle to keep up, or even to stay put., but reducing income inequality will benefit everyone, even those quite near...

policy.bristoluniversitypress.co.uk

60k a year gets you in the top 10pc supposedly

Couldn't find the links on that page, here's the LSE book launch thing:

 

[ska invita]

Couldn't find the links on that page,

 

[A380]

From this article about the book Why are Brits on £180k so sad?



Which brings us back to the initial title of the thread. I really think the left is as responsible for this situation as anyone. Its discussion of class over the years has been crashingly lacking in nuance and as invested in cultural signifiers as anyone else.

Increasingly I think that the ability to acquire assets beyond your house (and sometimes I'm not sure about excluding that) is what makes you middle class, and that includes pensions over and above the state pension.

To then complain that this makes a binman middle class is sloppy thinking. Yes, the ability to sit around for 20+ years at the end of your life enjoying yourself without working moves people towards the middle class in political leanings. Not necessarily very far, compared to owning multiple properties and a share portfolio, but definitely and definitively it does move them in that direction. Does a working class person deserve a good retirement? Yes, absolutely, but it also makes them a bit less working class. It's the obsession with all sorts of identitarian nonsense (even among those who attack identitarian nonsense) that makes this so hard for people to swallow.

Assets change your class position. Fin.

So basically anyone with a job in the public or third sector and 80% of people in the private sector are middle class?

Right….

Getting close to that bizarre position that anyone working can’t be working class. Top analysis there.

 

[pbsmooth]

Supposedly a good new book about the PMC... Link includes podcasts theyve done I think

Uncomfortably Off

Uncomfortably Off - Why Inequality Matters for High Earners; Uncomfortably Off reveals that those generally considered to be the most affluent feel anxious about the future and struggle to keep up, or even to stay put., but reducing income inequality will benefit everyone, even those quite near...

policy.bristoluniversitypress.co.uk

60k a year gets you in the top 10pc supposedly

sounds interesting. ties in with general feelings of 'downward mobility' for those who are doing OK but can't have what those before them had - so you feel like you're not as well off.

 

[chilango]

In this theme this is quite a good read:

We Have Never Been Middle Class

Tidings of a shrinking middle class in one part of the world and its expansion in another absorb our attention, but seldom do we question the category itself. We Have Never Been Middle Class proposes that the middle class is an ideology. Tracing this ideology up to the age of financialisation...

www.versobooks.com

 

[ska invita]

So basically anyone with a job in the public or third sector and 80% of people in the private sector are middle class?

Right….

Getting close to that bizarre position that anyone working can’t be working class. Top analysis there.

I'll let brainaddict speak for themselves but I agree with "Assets change your class position. Fin."

To what extent your class position changes is a matter of degree depending on the extent of asset owenership and nature of position within the workforce. Also it is impossible to consider British class structure without including globalised workers outside of our borders who are integral to British econmic structure (Chinese and Indian sweathshops etc etc). That changes the overal percentage ratio a lot.

The problem comes with trying to force the ever increasingly complex and stratified class position of any one individual (potentially complicated by the class positions of their immediate co-dependent family) into a three teir class system. Partly what I liked so much about Dan Evens Petit B book was how it shined a light on such a massive part of the class structure that was basically invisible in plain sight to most people.

Working Class with no owned building assetts and Working Class with owned building assetts are two different categories. There will be many shared conditions and there will be conditions which aren't. Airbrushing out those differences will also lead to airburshing out why allegiances and common political positions become harder to achieve.

It may seem unwieldy to have around 30 (a number picked off the top of my head) still-broad class positions, but I think thats whats necessary to be accurate and avoid weird assumptions and miscategorisations.