Do I have an elitism obsession?

Summary

The author reflects on the influence of social media on changing perceptions of upward mobility and lifestyle aspirations, contrasting historical social stratification with modern individualistic stratification.

Abstract

The author recounts personal experiences from working as a youth to support family income to observing shifts in future expectations among university peers, noting a trend towards material aspirations such as owning houses and cars. The narrative touches on the concept of upward mobility and its manifestation in modern societies, where social media plays a pivotal role in shaping lifestyle desires. Historical context is provided through a university seminar discussing the rigidity of class structures in Western European societies from 1450 to 1750. The author critically examines the transformation of social stratification, drawing on theories from sociologists like Max Weber and Karl Marx, and contrasts them with contemporary views represented by Kazuo Seiyama. Despite the perceived blurring of class lines, the author acknowledges the persistent influence of class on social interactions and future prospects. The essay concludes by questioning the existence of a "social media effect" that popularizes and unifies lifestyle aspirations across different social classes.

Opinions

The author believes that the purpose of work has evolved from supporting family to financing personal education and expenses.
There is a noted shift in future expectations among peers, from modest aspirations like personal book collections to more materialistic goals like owning property.
The author suggests that attending a prestigious university creates an expectation of securing a well-paying job and a high standard of living among students from low-income backgrounds.
Historical rigidity in social mobility is contrasted with modern fluidity, where individuals can change their socio-economic status through personal achievements and opportunities.
The author finds it intriguing that despite the apparent dissolution of traditional class distinctions, significant barriers to social interaction between different classes remain.
Social media is seen as a powerful influence in shaping lifestyle aspirations, with the potential to create uniform desires across various income groups.
The author expresses skepticism about the feasibility of achieving the lifestyles promoted by social media celebrities and questions whether this aspiration is widespread among the general population.

Do I have an elitism obsession?

The changing landscape in upward mobility and social media effect.

When I first began working as an apprentice at a body shop in 6th grade, I assumed work was simply something people did, and I should do it, too. It also served as a modest contribution to my parents’ income, which wasn’t truly sufficient for our family. Reflecting on it now, I realise that I almost never took a break, working every summer vacation throughout my school years. From university onward, the purpose of working while studying shifted from helping my parents to financing my own education and expenses. You’re already familiar with why I can’t stop thinking about money.

During chats with friends at the university, I began to notice a significant shift in future expectations. Those still studying primarily spoke about decorating their libraries with personal book collections. In contrast, those who had completed their studies and begun full-time work started discussing dreams of owning houses and cars. While a small segment of my friends maintained minimalist future ideals, the majority already had plans for consumption. My close friend group consisted of children from low-income families. Given that we attended one of the best universities in the country, nearly all of them anticipated securing well-paying jobs to ensure a high standard of living. This was a clear reflection of upward mobility prospects. As societies progress and adopt more open stratification systems — systems where there’s greater fluidity and flexibility in social mobility, allowing individuals to change their socio-economic status based on their achievements, efforts, and opportunities rather than just their birth or background — individuals can achieve a status and standard of living of their own, rather than settling for an inherited status.

In the elective history seminar on “Western European Societies: Politics & Culture (1450–1750),” the Professor discussed the mobility prospects of that era. He explained why it was almost impossible for individuals to lead a lifestyle different from their parents, as was the case for the peasantry, clergy, and nobles. While this fact might seem self-evident, what I found intriguing was the minimal interaction between these classes. It would be pure fantasy to imagine someone from the peasantry sharing a drink with the nobility after supper.

Today, things have certainly changed.

I’m not merely referring to the absence of peasantry, clergy, and nobility but also the increased opportunities for interaction between different classes. Different time periods were characterised by unique social segment traits. Classical sociological theories from thinkers like Max Weber and Karl Marx underscore the significance of factors such as class structures, access to resources, and social capital in determining mobility. Structural functionalists argue that societal stability hinges on a meritocratic system, where the most qualified individuals fill the most pivotal societal roles, thereby achieving upward mobility. Modern social stratification has undergone a significant transformation. Kazuo Seiyama contends that today’s social stratification is more individualistic, and class is no longer a requisite. Well, I agree that the class structure today does not reflect the patterns of classical sociology theories, but it is still a challenge to refute them. Moreover, it is still very hard to imagine a factory worker having a casual drink after dinner with the factory owner. They are certainly not neighbours, and their children are, most of the time, not friends. I think socialisation in a certain environment since childhood must have an impact on future prospects.

Returning to my friends and me, it was no surprise that our parents had similar income patterns. However, our concrete dreams for the future varied greatly. I found it surprising to witness such vast differences, which were not solely attributable to lifestyle, ideology, or personal tastes. Intriguingly, a significant factor was the amount of time spent on social media and the specific accounts one chose to follow.

When a friend talks about how they want to see the view of the lake/sea from their own Jacuzzi while taking a bath and enjoying a drink just like does, a couple of them agreed and said, “Oh boy, Kardashians are crazy”. Most of the time, we would talk for about 15 minutes about the person until another such name, Charli D’Amelio, Emma Chamberlain, came up. I find talking about these names, which I don’t know, by the way, boring. Still, I started believing that social media somehow poses unified lifestyles by popularising them. Although people from different social classes or income groups may not share the same environment, they can expose their environments to others via social media. Smart children of workers with good income prospects started to dream of other people's, e.g., social media celebrities’, lives. Does such a social media effect that imposes lifestyle exist? Do you also see that people yearn for lifestyles they see on social media?