Sibylla Bostoniensis

Social class is not the same thing as economic class.

A plumber that makes $83,865 a year is not poor, but is still a blue-collar worker.

A number of reader comments on my recent post "Class Time – none of which I have unscreened yet, because I am still mulling this among other things over – went directly, do not pass go, do not collect $200, to the topic of poverty, very obviously assuming that what I was trying to bring to your attention was the plight of the poor.

These comments are thoughtful, big-hearted, compassionate, and polite, and I approve heartily of their inclination. They come from a place of what their respective authors clearly think is agreement with what I wrote.

And they are also classist.

The assumption common among white-collar people that blue-collar equals poor (and that therefore what blue-collar people want and need is social aid) is classism – of exactly the kind of harmful obliviousness about class I was decrying in the post to which these comments were made in the spirit of support.

Indeed, it is what I hope to be writing next about on the topic of class, and how it impacts US politics on the left.

I know that none of you would ever say that all Black people are poor, even while you're perfectly cognizant of the way centuries of white supremacy have impeccuniated Black Americans and systematically deprived them of generational wealth. Poverty is a problem that disproportionately falls on Black people in this country, but that's not the same thing as all Black people being poor. And you wouldn't say such a thing, or think such a thing, or instantly pivot in a conversation about racism to a discussion of poverty, because you appreciate that reducing racism to poverty is very obviously a mistake, one that anybody who cares about addressing racism might well find offensive for a whole bunch of different reasons.

Well, assuming that all blue-collar people are poor is doing the same thing. Yes, blue-collar people typically earn less than white-collar people, and poverty disproportionately hits that population. But reducing classism to poverty is exactly the same mistake as reducing racism to poverty, and it's offensive in the same ways. We can address class related poverty without equating being blue-collar and being poor.

I don't want to call anyone out by name or directly confront anyone about this, especially over comments that come from such a good place. I don't want to shame anyone or embarrass them by pointing out their classism. Like I said in the post, for most people, classism isn't something they've ever worked on. They don't know the first thing about classism or what classist practices of thought or deed they might unwittingly be engaged in. I don't particularly want to make anyone feel badly for getting wrong something nobody ever told them is wrong, or how to get right.

But I did want to say something, because I think this is important, so I decided to post this instead.

Being concerned for the welfare of people who are economically struggling is a great good thing and an ornament to your character. It's something I hope you never stop doing. But it's not the same thing as being aware of social class or respectful about class differences. It's something different.

If you are one of the people who stepped on this particular landmine, please do not think that I think ill of you. To the contrary, this is the kind of error only generous-spirited people make, and if anything I only admire you for making it. Please carry on being your wonderful selves. I'll probably be keeping your comment screened, to protect you from embarrassment and the discussion from being derailed – though feel free to go back and edit your comment if you, in light of this, might approach what you said differently – not because I think it's terrible or as some sort of punishment. I appreciate your comments, and hope this won't deter your future comments or bum you too out.