What do you think?
Rate this book
Prolls: Die Dämonisierung der Arbeiterklasse
Medien und Politiker stempeln eine wachsende unterprivilegierte Bevölkerungsgruppe als rücksichtslos, dumm und kriminell ab. Die Mitglieder dieser Klasse werden mit einem haßerfüllten Wort bedacht: »Prolls«.
In seiner grundlegenden Studie untersucht Owen Jones, wie aus dem »Salz der Erde« der »Abschaum der Welt« werden konnte. Er zeichnet eine komplexe soziale Realität, während er die Unwissenheit und die Vorurteile entlarvt, die die überall zu findende Karikatur des »Prolls« formen.
Owen Jones berichtet von Krisenzentren inmitten der Welt des Wohlstands, von der wachsenden Armut und der Verzweiflung ganzer Gemeinden, deren Lage durch wirtschaftliche und soziale Verschiebungen immer prekärer wird, während die große Politik, von rechts wie von links bestimmt vom Neoliberalismus und Opportunismus, sie aufgegeben hat.
Das »Proll«-Stereotyp, so Owen Jones, wird von Politik und Medien benutzt, um die Notwendigkeit realer Veränderungen zu verdecken und die wachsende soziale Ungleichheit zu rechtfertigen. Auf der Basis von Gesprächen mit Politikern, Meinungsmachern und Arbeitern ist »Prolls« eine scharfe Anklage des Medien- und Politestablishments und das verstörende Porträt der Konsequenzen der sozialen Ungleichheit und des Klassenhasses in modernen Gesellschaften.
In seiner grundlegenden Studie untersucht Owen Jones, wie aus dem »Salz der Erde« der »Abschaum der Welt« werden konnte. Er zeichnet eine komplexe soziale Realität, während er die Unwissenheit und die Vorurteile entlarvt, die die überall zu findende Karikatur des »Prolls« formen.
Owen Jones berichtet von Krisenzentren inmitten der Welt des Wohlstands, von der wachsenden Armut und der Verzweiflung ganzer Gemeinden, deren Lage durch wirtschaftliche und soziale Verschiebungen immer prekärer wird, während die große Politik, von rechts wie von links bestimmt vom Neoliberalismus und Opportunismus, sie aufgegeben hat.
Das »Proll«-Stereotyp, so Owen Jones, wird von Politik und Medien benutzt, um die Notwendigkeit realer Veränderungen zu verdecken und die wachsende soziale Ungleichheit zu rechtfertigen. Auf der Basis von Gesprächen mit Politikern, Meinungsmachern und Arbeitern ist »Prolls« eine scharfe Anklage des Medien- und Politestablishments und das verstörende Porträt der Konsequenzen der sozialen Ungleichheit und des Klassenhasses in modernen Gesellschaften.
211 pages, Kindle Edition
First published July 15, 2011
1066 people are currently reading
19283 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 948 reviews
June 18, 2012
I grew up on a council estate and I remember the people who live on them with great fondness. I didn’t really know I was working class as I hadn’t become aware of the rigid structure of our society but working class I was then and remain now. That same fondness was once felt across the board, maybe not in full but the majority of people knew that those who lived on council estates were the “salt of the earth”, “the wheels of the economy” or simply that they “loved their mum and would do owt for you”. Those days and those feelings are gone and they are not gone because the people on estates have suddenly changed.
What has changed is the representation of a whole class, a majority indeed of people across the entire medium of communication. There has been a concerted effort on the part of politicians and media institutions to label the entire working class as cheaters, swindlers, oafs, alcoholic, racist, violent thugs who are a burden on our economy and our public services. This didn’t happen overnight, it is a steady drip, drip of misinformation and accusation that has gathered pace over the years. It started with Margaret Thatcher and her “liberalisation” agenda. The privatisation of public services coupled with the decimation of manufacturing created a cocktail of terror in the heartlands of northern England particularly and the rest of the country generally. In coal mining towns, all there was, was the coal mine. To de-industrialise alone without giving thought to re-energising those areas was positively criminal and has resulted in huge swathes of people who have been lost to our modern, allegedly burgeoning society. That is just one way the Tories, and Labour after them ruined the lives of countless ordinary people.
The trick however wasn’t to attack the working class employment alone, it was to turn the rest of society against them. Once these people couldn’t get work, it was their own fault we are told, and the tabloids jump on any “benefit cheat” story they can lay their hands on to which the end point is always, “they’re all like this”. Since then we have let government get away with this “you’re poor and it’s your fault” attitude. The fact that over half of all politicians in the House of Commons went to public (private, in reality) schools should give some idea of why this has come about, they are also paid a minimum of £68,000 per annum putting them in the top 9% of workers in the country. Ever since the poor acquired the vote the ruling class has been terrified of the power of democracy, so what do they do? Instead of governing in the interests of the majority they take away their options. Is it any wonder that the bottom decile of the population have the fewest people who go and vote? There is no one who represents their views and when that happens the far right will be the first shoulder to cry on as it fills a vacuum in its own cowardly way.
The media, also highly public school oriented, is equally culpable. When was the last time you saw a working class person on TV, a real one? That means not some sick Little Britain sketch that pokes fun at socially retarded single mothers, or the caricatures we see on the Jeremy Kyle show (other exploitative chat shows are available). It’s almost impossible to find any non-derogatory representation for the majority of society on our main medium of communication. When the BBC had its white-working-class season they had programmes made by and for the chattering classes as though working men and women were there to be poked with sticks and observed like some new species discovered in the jungles of Borneo. We have an elite media, reporting on an elite governing class who in turn carry out policies for elite corporate employers which are reported back to the general population by those same elite media operatives, where do working people get a look in?
Owen Jones book gets to the very heart of this subject with his passionate prose and elucidates the argument much better than I can. He crystallises the debate well through interviews with people on all sides of the class spectrum while proving his overriding point that the criticism levelled at the working class for the past 30 years has been false, misguided and unfair. He calls for a new politics of understanding and fairness, a change to the rigidity of society that only occasionally lets a poor person in to it to spice up the gene pool.
The best trick of all was getting the working class to fight among themselves for the scraps that fall from the top table to the floor, and getting the middle classes to think that it’s the ones at the bottom that is ripping them off. Benefit fraud comes to virtually nothing when compared with tax evasion and avoidance by the rich, but when was the last time Philip Green, The Barclay Brothers, Lord Rothemere and their ilk were on the cover of tabloids for the amount they rip us all off? They never are because we have the powerful people in power and other powerful people checking up on powerful people and it’s in all their interests to change nothing. In the working class they found their perfect scapegoat to keep their sordid little racket going, and everyone fell for it.
What has changed is the representation of a whole class, a majority indeed of people across the entire medium of communication. There has been a concerted effort on the part of politicians and media institutions to label the entire working class as cheaters, swindlers, oafs, alcoholic, racist, violent thugs who are a burden on our economy and our public services. This didn’t happen overnight, it is a steady drip, drip of misinformation and accusation that has gathered pace over the years. It started with Margaret Thatcher and her “liberalisation” agenda. The privatisation of public services coupled with the decimation of manufacturing created a cocktail of terror in the heartlands of northern England particularly and the rest of the country generally. In coal mining towns, all there was, was the coal mine. To de-industrialise alone without giving thought to re-energising those areas was positively criminal and has resulted in huge swathes of people who have been lost to our modern, allegedly burgeoning society. That is just one way the Tories, and Labour after them ruined the lives of countless ordinary people.
The trick however wasn’t to attack the working class employment alone, it was to turn the rest of society against them. Once these people couldn’t get work, it was their own fault we are told, and the tabloids jump on any “benefit cheat” story they can lay their hands on to which the end point is always, “they’re all like this”. Since then we have let government get away with this “you’re poor and it’s your fault” attitude. The fact that over half of all politicians in the House of Commons went to public (private, in reality) schools should give some idea of why this has come about, they are also paid a minimum of £68,000 per annum putting them in the top 9% of workers in the country. Ever since the poor acquired the vote the ruling class has been terrified of the power of democracy, so what do they do? Instead of governing in the interests of the majority they take away their options. Is it any wonder that the bottom decile of the population have the fewest people who go and vote? There is no one who represents their views and when that happens the far right will be the first shoulder to cry on as it fills a vacuum in its own cowardly way.
The media, also highly public school oriented, is equally culpable. When was the last time you saw a working class person on TV, a real one? That means not some sick Little Britain sketch that pokes fun at socially retarded single mothers, or the caricatures we see on the Jeremy Kyle show (other exploitative chat shows are available). It’s almost impossible to find any non-derogatory representation for the majority of society on our main medium of communication. When the BBC had its white-working-class season they had programmes made by and for the chattering classes as though working men and women were there to be poked with sticks and observed like some new species discovered in the jungles of Borneo. We have an elite media, reporting on an elite governing class who in turn carry out policies for elite corporate employers which are reported back to the general population by those same elite media operatives, where do working people get a look in?
Owen Jones book gets to the very heart of this subject with his passionate prose and elucidates the argument much better than I can. He crystallises the debate well through interviews with people on all sides of the class spectrum while proving his overriding point that the criticism levelled at the working class for the past 30 years has been false, misguided and unfair. He calls for a new politics of understanding and fairness, a change to the rigidity of society that only occasionally lets a poor person in to it to spice up the gene pool.
The best trick of all was getting the working class to fight among themselves for the scraps that fall from the top table to the floor, and getting the middle classes to think that it’s the ones at the bottom that is ripping them off. Benefit fraud comes to virtually nothing when compared with tax evasion and avoidance by the rich, but when was the last time Philip Green, The Barclay Brothers, Lord Rothemere and their ilk were on the cover of tabloids for the amount they rip us all off? They never are because we have the powerful people in power and other powerful people checking up on powerful people and it’s in all their interests to change nothing. In the working class they found their perfect scapegoat to keep their sordid little racket going, and everyone fell for it.
August 31, 2019
This is a wonderful book, and I strongly recommend it. This might be a bit of a strange review, because I don’t think I’m hardly going to talk about this book as much as I should, but rather about a play I saw on the weekend. The point is that the play made me think of this book and I might not have written a review of the book at all other than because of the play, although I’ve now read most of this book twice now.
Some quick background. Chavs is an English term for working class people. The equivalent term in Australia is Bogan. Both mean uncouth and lacking in taste, style or class. Both are used exclusively as a caricature of what it means to be white-working-class in Australia and Britain. Originally, I was told CHAV was an abbreviation of ‘Council Housed And Violent’ – but apparently this is more a myth, and the word comes from a Romany word for child. As someone who has always been fascinated by Gypsies, that came as a surprise too.
The world is full of paradoxes, for instance, we are supposed to live in a ‘classless society’ – you know, where everyone is ‘middle class’. But one of the really interesting things in this is that the number of people who now refer to themselves as working class has taken a recent up-tick. The problem is, of course, that ‘middle class’ isn’t the opposite of ‘working class’. Middle class implies an upper and a lower – rather than a working. The middle class, however it is defined, tends to work.
The shift recently has been away from seeing the working class as the ‘salt of the earth’ and seeing them more as bigoted, stupid, greedy, selfish, welfare (and just about everything else) cheats. That this change has occurred at a time when our societies are systematically dismantling the welfare state smells a lot like ‘blaming the victim’.
I found the play deeply disturbing. I’ve been going to plays at Malthouse Theatre for the last five years or so, and generally love the plays. But this year has been very disappointing – and this play all the more so. It was written by a young woman who said her family are working class, and that they think she is crazy for being interested in the arts. And so she feels she now stands somewhere between working and middle class. Don’t get me wrong – this is pretty much where I feel I stand too. It is an oddly isolating place to be – one where you never quite feel you fit in. If the play had been about this, it would have been one I would have remembered for a very long time, and possibly one I might have praised excessively highly.
The problem is that she has written a play that is meant to be ‘funny’ – and so it is a kind of string of clichés and stereotypes of working and middle class identities hardly tied together. By far the people who come off the worst in this are the working class characters. Basically, the middle class in the play (it was called Australian Realness, by the way) are not only drunken and angry, they are also basically seeking to tear down Western civilization. The middle class are merely gormless, the working class are too stupid to know the damage they are causing.
I said before that the Australian word for Chav is Bogan – well, the other word to know is CUB – a Cashed Up Bogan – that is, someone with lots of money, but no taste. This was a major theme of the play. The nice middle class family had come upon financial hard times, but they still had the cultural capital that told them the right wines to drink and the beers they should avoid. But the working class are working as plumbers and so on – and have lots of money, but obviously no taste at all. What a terrible inversion…and how terribly amusing too…
The notes for the play suggested that the writer wanted it to encourage people to think about the nature of class differences in Australia – but really, you can’t achieve critical reflections upon the basis of a series of clichés and stereotypes. Stereotypes reinforce prejudice and stop people thinking. That’s literally their point, to allow us to not have to think about (or know how to respond to) people we press into the stereotype.
This book holds a mirror up to how differently we treat people in our societies – although, obviously, mostly in Britain – based on how we understand social class. It also shows that you are allowed to say and think things about the working class that would be impossible to think or say about most other social groups. At least, in polite company. If you are wondering, you should read book. It’s quick and says pretty much what we, as a society, need to hear right about now.
Some quick background. Chavs is an English term for working class people. The equivalent term in Australia is Bogan. Both mean uncouth and lacking in taste, style or class. Both are used exclusively as a caricature of what it means to be white-working-class in Australia and Britain. Originally, I was told CHAV was an abbreviation of ‘Council Housed And Violent’ – but apparently this is more a myth, and the word comes from a Romany word for child. As someone who has always been fascinated by Gypsies, that came as a surprise too.
The world is full of paradoxes, for instance, we are supposed to live in a ‘classless society’ – you know, where everyone is ‘middle class’. But one of the really interesting things in this is that the number of people who now refer to themselves as working class has taken a recent up-tick. The problem is, of course, that ‘middle class’ isn’t the opposite of ‘working class’. Middle class implies an upper and a lower – rather than a working. The middle class, however it is defined, tends to work.
The shift recently has been away from seeing the working class as the ‘salt of the earth’ and seeing them more as bigoted, stupid, greedy, selfish, welfare (and just about everything else) cheats. That this change has occurred at a time when our societies are systematically dismantling the welfare state smells a lot like ‘blaming the victim’.
I found the play deeply disturbing. I’ve been going to plays at Malthouse Theatre for the last five years or so, and generally love the plays. But this year has been very disappointing – and this play all the more so. It was written by a young woman who said her family are working class, and that they think she is crazy for being interested in the arts. And so she feels she now stands somewhere between working and middle class. Don’t get me wrong – this is pretty much where I feel I stand too. It is an oddly isolating place to be – one where you never quite feel you fit in. If the play had been about this, it would have been one I would have remembered for a very long time, and possibly one I might have praised excessively highly.
The problem is that she has written a play that is meant to be ‘funny’ – and so it is a kind of string of clichés and stereotypes of working and middle class identities hardly tied together. By far the people who come off the worst in this are the working class characters. Basically, the middle class in the play (it was called Australian Realness, by the way) are not only drunken and angry, they are also basically seeking to tear down Western civilization. The middle class are merely gormless, the working class are too stupid to know the damage they are causing.
I said before that the Australian word for Chav is Bogan – well, the other word to know is CUB – a Cashed Up Bogan – that is, someone with lots of money, but no taste. This was a major theme of the play. The nice middle class family had come upon financial hard times, but they still had the cultural capital that told them the right wines to drink and the beers they should avoid. But the working class are working as plumbers and so on – and have lots of money, but obviously no taste at all. What a terrible inversion…and how terribly amusing too…
The notes for the play suggested that the writer wanted it to encourage people to think about the nature of class differences in Australia – but really, you can’t achieve critical reflections upon the basis of a series of clichés and stereotypes. Stereotypes reinforce prejudice and stop people thinking. That’s literally their point, to allow us to not have to think about (or know how to respond to) people we press into the stereotype.
This book holds a mirror up to how differently we treat people in our societies – although, obviously, mostly in Britain – based on how we understand social class. It also shows that you are allowed to say and think things about the working class that would be impossible to think or say about most other social groups. At least, in polite company. If you are wondering, you should read book. It’s quick and says pretty much what we, as a society, need to hear right about now.
May 28, 2013
Owen Jones far from objective writing should be placed into context. Much of his 'observations' are not first hand and viewed through some pretty thick filters and deep blinkers. The son of a local authority worker and IT lecturer in the North of England whose parents met at a Militant Tendency rally, he came through sixth form college to read history at Oxford and complete hi MA in US history in 2007. His pre-authoring life was spent as a trade union lobbyist. There is no proud history of the working class in his short life and he wasn't even alive during the Thatcher era, yet this is a deeply biased and personal viewpoint based on some fairly tenuous connections and some deliberate misreading.
We start with a partial lexicological review of the term Chav from the "Romany Root", chavi , meaning child. But there it ends because I suspect Jones knows no-one in the traveller community and so he doesn't understand how the term is applied. A chavi is normally a teen who exhibits 'laddish' behaviour and is exclusively male. They are 'brand aware' and despite the vox-pop have access to significant funds. The term percolated into non-traveller youth initially in the SOuth East where the traveller community has strong roots and not in the "proud North". It spread quickly on the back of knock off branded imports and became a uniform amongst those members of society that exhibited chavi behaviour, who were and are not exclusively 'working class' in any sense. I observed this happening directly over the last 20 years so I know this to be true - I didn't read or imagine it and I'm not fitting the experience to my own politics.
And this is the problem. Jones writes about situations that he doesn't observe directly but gets from the pages of the media, which is why this book is less about the demonisation of the working class and more an assault on his peers - Oxbridge and Russell Group university educated hacks. Jones equates chavs to the working class when there is little evidence this is so, just as he assigns the UK riots to the same working class in some kind ofup rising of the grouping against an unfair government. Evidence of prosecutions that resulted showed this not to be the case, as did the volume of listings on ebay that followed the riots as the 'proud rioters' attempted to unload their booty (in the non-buttock sense of the word).
For me this book is fundamentally dishonest. Poorly researched and heavily biased, Jones lambasts the middle class of which, economically at least, he is part. The rest is indirectly observed and a rant more against the media than support for some working class idyll of which he has no experience. I take this personally. My parents were manual workers at the lowest echelon of that grouping and worked incredibly hard yet my dad was a staunch Tory - he just didn't trust people who used politics to elevate themselves whilst proclaiming to support the very working class they were eager to leave behind. It was a very individual opinion. I have lived amongst the traveller community and experienced its own influence on my kids and the rise of the 'chavi' culture, rather than chav. I wouldn't have written this book as I can't really make any of my experiences so conveniently fit a political agenda. None of the the issues that Jones touches so lightly upon are that simple.
In the end I think this book is disingenuous. JOnes misrepresents himself and events to such an extent that any conclusions he reaches are moot. The ranting of a juvenile political activist with poor research. There is no insight here.
We start with a partial lexicological review of the term Chav from the "Romany Root", chavi , meaning child. But there it ends because I suspect Jones knows no-one in the traveller community and so he doesn't understand how the term is applied. A chavi is normally a teen who exhibits 'laddish' behaviour and is exclusively male. They are 'brand aware' and despite the vox-pop have access to significant funds. The term percolated into non-traveller youth initially in the SOuth East where the traveller community has strong roots and not in the "proud North". It spread quickly on the back of knock off branded imports and became a uniform amongst those members of society that exhibited chavi behaviour, who were and are not exclusively 'working class' in any sense. I observed this happening directly over the last 20 years so I know this to be true - I didn't read or imagine it and I'm not fitting the experience to my own politics.
And this is the problem. Jones writes about situations that he doesn't observe directly but gets from the pages of the media, which is why this book is less about the demonisation of the working class and more an assault on his peers - Oxbridge and Russell Group university educated hacks. Jones equates chavs to the working class when there is little evidence this is so, just as he assigns the UK riots to the same working class in some kind ofup rising of the grouping against an unfair government. Evidence of prosecutions that resulted showed this not to be the case, as did the volume of listings on ebay that followed the riots as the 'proud rioters' attempted to unload their booty (in the non-buttock sense of the word).
For me this book is fundamentally dishonest. Poorly researched and heavily biased, Jones lambasts the middle class of which, economically at least, he is part. The rest is indirectly observed and a rant more against the media than support for some working class idyll of which he has no experience. I take this personally. My parents were manual workers at the lowest echelon of that grouping and worked incredibly hard yet my dad was a staunch Tory - he just didn't trust people who used politics to elevate themselves whilst proclaiming to support the very working class they were eager to leave behind. It was a very individual opinion. I have lived amongst the traveller community and experienced its own influence on my kids and the rise of the 'chavi' culture, rather than chav. I wouldn't have written this book as I can't really make any of my experiences so conveniently fit a political agenda. None of the the issues that Jones touches so lightly upon are that simple.
In the end I think this book is disingenuous. JOnes misrepresents himself and events to such an extent that any conclusions he reaches are moot. The ranting of a juvenile political activist with poor research. There is no insight here.
July 9, 2017
I agree with the author about Margaret Thatcher and her cruel war on the British poor. But the liberal and left elites now in charge have been even worse in oppressing Britain's indigenous working classes and lumpenproletriat
It was indeed Margaret Thatcher who persecuted the working classes of Britain, taking delight in causing British children to starve and live on the streets but now it is the liberal and left elites who have joined the Thatcherites in persecuting and impoverishing the British working classes.
The basic problem is that the left and liberal elite are no longer interested in class equity or the basic rights of the British working class but only in 'non racism' which is a farcical label for favoring the third world exotic brown immigrants and persecuting and demonizing the local white working class who they label as chavs-not worthy in the eyes of the left/liberal toffs of having their suffering, feelings or rights considered. The British working class suffered as much in the Industrial Revolution as the Blacks did under slavery but are still suffering with the elite classes using pc propaganda and favouring of the third world exotic browns against them.
Britain's indigenous working classes are put last in line for employment, council housing, health care, education and bank loans in favour of the exotic Third world immigrants (especially Muslims) favoured by the pc left elites.
. Those who are flabbergasted at discrimination based on race, gender, sexuality of religion (unless of course you attack Jews for being 'Zionists' or attack Israelis-that is acceptable among the chattering classes) think nothing of attacking the British working class and lumpenproletriat as chavs. This also translates to a politically correct anti-white racism. White British young people who suffer as a result of social problems such as juvenile crime, drug addiction , and teenage pregnancy and come from broken homes no longer elicit sympathy from the liberal and left elites who consider the white underclass the lowest of the low, not worth saving or empathizing with, whereas they would have the utmost sympathy and support for Third world immigrant youth under the same circumstances.
The liberal and left elites now use the race card against he white under classes and point out since the latter are supposedly 'racist' and 'bigoted' they must be punished for this and are the unworthy poor as compared to the impoverished people of colour who are deemed worthy of empathy and upliftment.
This amounts to an inverse racism whereby the classes that have so long suffered since the Industrial Revolution and who came under sustained attack under Thatcher are now being made victims again at the hands of the leftist and liberal elites now in charge of Britain, including the media, local councils and the courts. This is not a racist review as leftist correcto-fascists and reverse racist may charge but instead aims to speak up for Britain's most voiceless and unprotected.
It was indeed Margaret Thatcher who persecuted the working classes of Britain, taking delight in causing British children to starve and live on the streets but now it is the liberal and left elites who have joined the Thatcherites in persecuting and impoverishing the British working classes.
The basic problem is that the left and liberal elite are no longer interested in class equity or the basic rights of the British working class but only in 'non racism' which is a farcical label for favoring the third world exotic brown immigrants and persecuting and demonizing the local white working class who they label as chavs-not worthy in the eyes of the left/liberal toffs of having their suffering, feelings or rights considered. The British working class suffered as much in the Industrial Revolution as the Blacks did under slavery but are still suffering with the elite classes using pc propaganda and favouring of the third world exotic browns against them.
Britain's indigenous working classes are put last in line for employment, council housing, health care, education and bank loans in favour of the exotic Third world immigrants (especially Muslims) favoured by the pc left elites.
. Those who are flabbergasted at discrimination based on race, gender, sexuality of religion (unless of course you attack Jews for being 'Zionists' or attack Israelis-that is acceptable among the chattering classes) think nothing of attacking the British working class and lumpenproletriat as chavs. This also translates to a politically correct anti-white racism. White British young people who suffer as a result of social problems such as juvenile crime, drug addiction , and teenage pregnancy and come from broken homes no longer elicit sympathy from the liberal and left elites who consider the white underclass the lowest of the low, not worth saving or empathizing with, whereas they would have the utmost sympathy and support for Third world immigrant youth under the same circumstances.
The liberal and left elites now use the race card against he white under classes and point out since the latter are supposedly 'racist' and 'bigoted' they must be punished for this and are the unworthy poor as compared to the impoverished people of colour who are deemed worthy of empathy and upliftment.
This amounts to an inverse racism whereby the classes that have so long suffered since the Industrial Revolution and who came under sustained attack under Thatcher are now being made victims again at the hands of the leftist and liberal elites now in charge of Britain, including the media, local councils and the courts. This is not a racist review as leftist correcto-fascists and reverse racist may charge but instead aims to speak up for Britain's most voiceless and unprotected.
August 15, 2017
Honestly? I'm so glad I read this book. I grew up in an environment where it was cool to hate Chavs. Where they were scroungers and idiots and dangers to my community. But this study has helped to undo any of the prejudice that was still left from my teenage years. Jones explains how the right-wing press are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the portrayal of the white working class as complete scumbags. It is a classic divide-and-conquer move by Tories to pit working class communities against each other. When the real enemy? It's the right-wing exploiters.
I urge you to read this book if you have ever looked at a council estate and thought about how much of a dump it looks, if you have ever laughed at a single mother on Jeremy Kyle, if you've ever condemned someone for receiving benefits. Class politics is embedded so deep into British culture, but reading Jones's book is an immense effort to turn the focus from the victims to the perpetrators.
I urge you to read this book if you have ever looked at a council estate and thought about how much of a dump it looks, if you have ever laughed at a single mother on Jeremy Kyle, if you've ever condemned someone for receiving benefits. Class politics is embedded so deep into British culture, but reading Jones's book is an immense effort to turn the focus from the victims to the perpetrators.
June 1, 2013
When the new Eagles stadium here in Philly was being built, at the expense of taxpayers, a policy was put into place by the team. In order for a season ticket holder to still be a season ticket holder in the new stadium, the person would have to pay for the privilege of buying the tickets. This was done so that the 900 level fans (the rowdy bunch to put it mildly) wouldn’t be able to get them. It was class thing; a better class of people would come to the games. Meaning those well off from Jersey and the suburbs, who didn’t pay for the stadium.
Now tell me, that Chavs isn’t relevant to Americans even though it is about British class. Jones might be talking about the British view of the working class but we still have that here in the states – pick a reality show. The only difference is that the middle class is equally willing to be snobbish about rich people and the names of political parties.
Now tell me, that Chavs isn’t relevant to Americans even though it is about British class. Jones might be talking about the British view of the working class but we still have that here in the states – pick a reality show. The only difference is that the middle class is equally willing to be snobbish about rich people and the names of political parties.
September 2, 2013
A REVIEW OF OWEN JONES "CHAVS" FROM SOMEONE WHO ACTUALLY READ IT!
(Review originally posted on Amazons uk site where the other reviews referred to can be seen).
I would hazard a guess that Owen Jones "Chavs: The Demonization of the Working Class" is one of the worst reviewed books on Amazon. I speak with particular regard to the 1 & 2-star reviews, of which the majority appear not to have read beyond the books title, made the assumption that Jones regards Working Class and Chavs to be the same thing, got themselves worked up into no-end of a frenzy, rushed to their computer to post an asinine negative review. Interestingly enough, if one counts up the amount of Amazon verified purchases of the book (thus far) only 6 out of the 33 one and two-star reviews are verified purchases (18%), with regard to the five-star reviews 39 out of 82 are Amazon verified purchases (48%). Though hardly scientific proof, this would appear to suggest that a good many of the one and two-star reviewers are no more likely to have read a copy of the book than pie in the sky.
Anyway, that's enough of reviewing the reviews, onto the actual book itself. Jones point is straightforward: the most frequent representations of the working classes in the mass media are that of the Chav type. He is not saying that this type does not exist, or that every working class person is a Chav. Simply that the main media representation is that of Chav type, and that this fact strongly flavours popular perspectives of the lower orders. It is that simple.
The rest of the book, using a mixture of examples, interviews with various politicians, academics and others, looks at how the lower orders (of which incidentally I am one) have become such a marginalised, underpaid, disparaged and misrepresented segment of our society. Not surprisingly, at least not to anyone with the slightest knowledge of post war history, in particular the last thirty-five or so years, it is the changes wrought by the Thatcher administrations, continued under Major, followed by Blair, Brown and with gusto by the Cameron-Clegg crowd. Simply put working class organisations, built up over the preceding two centuries have been under continuous attack, the industrial and mining sectors of the economy, which provided a high level of quality working class employment were destroyed with varying degrees of culpability: with regard to mining this was virtually 100% intentional. At the same time benefits for those unfortunate to be unemployed or ill have declined in value, decent job opportunities are available to fewer than ever, wages have failed to keep up with productivity, housing has become increasingly problematic: expensive rental sector or an expensive mortgage, or an ever shrinking and harder to enter social housing sector.
Though definitely not a great work of theory, or academic in nature, Jones is quite capable of using the statistical evidence to underline his points, and includes data on such things as the growing disparities in wealth, the lower proportion of GDP going to wages (as opposed to the increasing share going to owners of capital), the effect of immigration on wages, etc.
In short Owen Jones has produced a fine piece of popular writing on a subject that is rarely tackled in the mainstream media. It is a fine entry level text for the general reader interested in the representations and realities of working class folks in these last thirty odd years, so forget the mindlessly negative reviews (and C.Pittards nit-picking 2-star screed which is currently the leading review) and just read it.
(Review originally posted on Amazons uk site where the other reviews referred to can be seen).
I would hazard a guess that Owen Jones "Chavs: The Demonization of the Working Class" is one of the worst reviewed books on Amazon. I speak with particular regard to the 1 & 2-star reviews, of which the majority appear not to have read beyond the books title, made the assumption that Jones regards Working Class and Chavs to be the same thing, got themselves worked up into no-end of a frenzy, rushed to their computer to post an asinine negative review. Interestingly enough, if one counts up the amount of Amazon verified purchases of the book (thus far) only 6 out of the 33 one and two-star reviews are verified purchases (18%), with regard to the five-star reviews 39 out of 82 are Amazon verified purchases (48%). Though hardly scientific proof, this would appear to suggest that a good many of the one and two-star reviewers are no more likely to have read a copy of the book than pie in the sky.
Anyway, that's enough of reviewing the reviews, onto the actual book itself. Jones point is straightforward: the most frequent representations of the working classes in the mass media are that of the Chav type. He is not saying that this type does not exist, or that every working class person is a Chav. Simply that the main media representation is that of Chav type, and that this fact strongly flavours popular perspectives of the lower orders. It is that simple.
The rest of the book, using a mixture of examples, interviews with various politicians, academics and others, looks at how the lower orders (of which incidentally I am one) have become such a marginalised, underpaid, disparaged and misrepresented segment of our society. Not surprisingly, at least not to anyone with the slightest knowledge of post war history, in particular the last thirty-five or so years, it is the changes wrought by the Thatcher administrations, continued under Major, followed by Blair, Brown and with gusto by the Cameron-Clegg crowd. Simply put working class organisations, built up over the preceding two centuries have been under continuous attack, the industrial and mining sectors of the economy, which provided a high level of quality working class employment were destroyed with varying degrees of culpability: with regard to mining this was virtually 100% intentional. At the same time benefits for those unfortunate to be unemployed or ill have declined in value, decent job opportunities are available to fewer than ever, wages have failed to keep up with productivity, housing has become increasingly problematic: expensive rental sector or an expensive mortgage, or an ever shrinking and harder to enter social housing sector.
Though definitely not a great work of theory, or academic in nature, Jones is quite capable of using the statistical evidence to underline his points, and includes data on such things as the growing disparities in wealth, the lower proportion of GDP going to wages (as opposed to the increasing share going to owners of capital), the effect of immigration on wages, etc.
In short Owen Jones has produced a fine piece of popular writing on a subject that is rarely tackled in the mainstream media. It is a fine entry level text for the general reader interested in the representations and realities of working class folks in these last thirty odd years, so forget the mindlessly negative reviews (and C.Pittards nit-picking 2-star screed which is currently the leading review) and just read it.
December 7, 2011
One of the things I couldn’t quite comprehend in the middle of the decade we seem to be calling the noughties was the popularity of the TV show Little Britain among my seemingly sensitive, liberal or progressive circle of friends and acquaintances. I thought for a while that was another version of being not-of-Britain and therefore not getting, for instance, Peter Kay’s humour – but at least in Peter Kay’s case I recognised a degree of affection for the Northern lifestyle his recurrent TV shows seemed to be about. Little Britain, on the other hand, seemed to be driven by class hatred to become a half hour of bile and venom directed at Britain’s working class. Every now and then I’d come across a newspaper column or on-line source that made similar kinds of points (most eloquently, I recall, Barbara Ellen in The Observer) – but it seemed that these voices (and my perplexed sense that there was no way this was funny) were held to be the humourless malcontents among us. How delighted then was I to read this, and find out there is a compelling and rigorous case to be made that during the last thirty years there has been class war that the working class lost, and it has been ‘talked’ out of existence.
This is no discourse analysis of the kind so favoured by many a contemporary analyst, but a sound piece of political analysis with a solid materialist base (from a left social democrat stance) that finds a profound contradiction in British political life where the trauma inflicted on British workers by neo-liberalism has been denied by claims that we’re all middle class now, except for an underclass (characterised by the ‘chav’ stereotype) who are only in their own miserable position because of their personal failing and fecklessness (the rampant use of the word feckless in the wake of Britain’s riots during the summer of 2011 is hardly coincidental). The class war Jones makes sense of is one that has seen the destruction of a working class world as well as such cultural characteristics as communality, association, collective life and the like in favour of the unfettered individualism lionised by the neo-liberalism of Thatcherism, New Labour and assorted other political tendencies.
There are two elements of the book I think work particularly well. One is a story that is not told enough, where ‘Broken Britain’, a term so favoured by David Cameron, is re-presented as the post-industrialised shattered communities devastated by repeated government policies that killed off mining and industrial communities (Jones tell this story through a Northumberland ex-mining village, and the effects on Longbridge near Birmingham of the closure of the Rover car plant). It is an impressive piece of work and chilling. The other is a story told regularly on the left but overlooked by many others – the effective community organisation the drove the neo-fascist British National Party (BNP) from its political foothold in Barking and Dagenham in Essex. The Barking and Dagenham story then becomes an effective way to hammer home the point that much of the right’s tactics, especially its focus on immigration as a social and political issue, divides working people and continues to allow the plutocrats in whose interests neo-liberalism works and who caused the current economic crises to keep on acting as they have for the last couple of decades.
The political challenges Jones draws out – including the left’s retreat from class, the problems of organising in a class-based framework when most of our models are grounded in an increasingly invalid-in-Britain model of large industrialised work places, the challenges of the power and increasingly common-sense status of the right’s analysis of social breakdown, and immigration as the problem when the claims made merely mask the effects of neo-liberal policies among others – are daunting, but essential. I’m not convinced by all of Jones’s case, but the big picture is compelling – and I am grateful that he got beyond an analysis that sees the demonization of the working class as only a media effect, in favour of a close reading of the political shifts of the last thirty years or more and the myth that we’re all middle class. Strongly recommended.
This is no discourse analysis of the kind so favoured by many a contemporary analyst, but a sound piece of political analysis with a solid materialist base (from a left social democrat stance) that finds a profound contradiction in British political life where the trauma inflicted on British workers by neo-liberalism has been denied by claims that we’re all middle class now, except for an underclass (characterised by the ‘chav’ stereotype) who are only in their own miserable position because of their personal failing and fecklessness (the rampant use of the word feckless in the wake of Britain’s riots during the summer of 2011 is hardly coincidental). The class war Jones makes sense of is one that has seen the destruction of a working class world as well as such cultural characteristics as communality, association, collective life and the like in favour of the unfettered individualism lionised by the neo-liberalism of Thatcherism, New Labour and assorted other political tendencies.
There are two elements of the book I think work particularly well. One is a story that is not told enough, where ‘Broken Britain’, a term so favoured by David Cameron, is re-presented as the post-industrialised shattered communities devastated by repeated government policies that killed off mining and industrial communities (Jones tell this story through a Northumberland ex-mining village, and the effects on Longbridge near Birmingham of the closure of the Rover car plant). It is an impressive piece of work and chilling. The other is a story told regularly on the left but overlooked by many others – the effective community organisation the drove the neo-fascist British National Party (BNP) from its political foothold in Barking and Dagenham in Essex. The Barking and Dagenham story then becomes an effective way to hammer home the point that much of the right’s tactics, especially its focus on immigration as a social and political issue, divides working people and continues to allow the plutocrats in whose interests neo-liberalism works and who caused the current economic crises to keep on acting as they have for the last couple of decades.
The political challenges Jones draws out – including the left’s retreat from class, the problems of organising in a class-based framework when most of our models are grounded in an increasingly invalid-in-Britain model of large industrialised work places, the challenges of the power and increasingly common-sense status of the right’s analysis of social breakdown, and immigration as the problem when the claims made merely mask the effects of neo-liberal policies among others – are daunting, but essential. I’m not convinced by all of Jones’s case, but the big picture is compelling – and I am grateful that he got beyond an analysis that sees the demonization of the working class as only a media effect, in favour of a close reading of the political shifts of the last thirty years or more and the myth that we’re all middle class. Strongly recommended.
January 2, 2016
A provocative and stirring book that—despite its British-centric focus—has much to say about modern American politics as it does with the political climate in the U.K. of the past three decades. Now, one of the great political developments of the late 20th to early 21st century has been the "de-politicization" of class and the demonization of the working-class. (Initially brought about by class warriors on the Right—such as Margaret Thatcher and her right-wing brand of Toryism—during the 1980s, but later unchallenged, in a significant fashion, by much of the center-left parties [such as New Labour] in the decade that followed.)
Today, in an age of tremendous inequality, economic dislocation, and the rise of plutocratic-driven societies ushering a new Gilded Age, the issues surrounding class are, now more than ever, at the forefront of public discussion. As such, this book—whether one agrees or disagrees with the author's contentions—is an essential read that provides context to our most challenging times.
Today, in an age of tremendous inequality, economic dislocation, and the rise of plutocratic-driven societies ushering a new Gilded Age, the issues surrounding class are, now more than ever, at the forefront of public discussion. As such, this book—whether one agrees or disagrees with the author's contentions—is an essential read that provides context to our most challenging times.
August 26, 2012
In a world where we have recently seen economic collapse and the formation of the 'Occupy 'movement, Owen Jones' 'Chavs' is at it's most relevant. As the rich-poor wealth gap grows, there is a global feeling of disfranchisment among the 99%, and with the United Kingdom being one of the most unequal countries in the West, questions are being raised as to why this is happening.
In the course of addressing the complex issues surrounding the current crisis, Jones places much emphasis on the policies of the Thatcher government. 'Chavs' marks the de-industrialization of Britain during the 1980's as a seminal moment in the dissolution of the traditional working class community, combined Thatchers ideological campaign of eradicating Class and collective struggle in favour of a more individualistic, consumer based population. Jones' methodical approach to statistics and research makes for compelling evidence for this argument, while demonstrating the effects Thatchers policies on Mining and industrial communities at the time, and how those policies blight them still.
Whilst there is no doubt this is a book firmly of Left Wing politics, Tony Blair and New Labour come under scrutiny for their continuation of Thatcherite policies, and their transition from party of the Working classes to the guardians of the Middle classes. 'Chavs' also charges New labour with establishing the United Kingdom as a 'Meritocracy', using a form of Social Darwinism to blame the poor and unemployed for their lot in life, as under Tony Blair it was personal inadequacy, rather than social inequality that was to blame. Even the stark facts that substandard schooling, housing and healthcare have drastically stacked the dice against the Lower Classes, have been dismissed by Blairs cabinet, and now under the currrent Coalition government.
'Chavs' really is a clarion call for action and for change. As the facts stand, the Rich cost society far more in unpaid taxes than the supposed rampant menace of Benefit fraud. The coalition continues to give corporations increasing large tax breaks, while VAT rises and those with the lowest incomes foot the bill for the Bankers greed. This picture is being played out again and again throughout the world. It highlights the fact that Globalization is only making a select few rich, while the majority gets poorer, and as Jones' states, this race to the bottom cannot continue.
This is not just about the UK, it is a portrait of injustice that has gone unchecked for far too long.
In the course of addressing the complex issues surrounding the current crisis, Jones places much emphasis on the policies of the Thatcher government. 'Chavs' marks the de-industrialization of Britain during the 1980's as a seminal moment in the dissolution of the traditional working class community, combined Thatchers ideological campaign of eradicating Class and collective struggle in favour of a more individualistic, consumer based population. Jones' methodical approach to statistics and research makes for compelling evidence for this argument, while demonstrating the effects Thatchers policies on Mining and industrial communities at the time, and how those policies blight them still.
Whilst there is no doubt this is a book firmly of Left Wing politics, Tony Blair and New Labour come under scrutiny for their continuation of Thatcherite policies, and their transition from party of the Working classes to the guardians of the Middle classes. 'Chavs' also charges New labour with establishing the United Kingdom as a 'Meritocracy', using a form of Social Darwinism to blame the poor and unemployed for their lot in life, as under Tony Blair it was personal inadequacy, rather than social inequality that was to blame. Even the stark facts that substandard schooling, housing and healthcare have drastically stacked the dice against the Lower Classes, have been dismissed by Blairs cabinet, and now under the currrent Coalition government.
'Chavs' really is a clarion call for action and for change. As the facts stand, the Rich cost society far more in unpaid taxes than the supposed rampant menace of Benefit fraud. The coalition continues to give corporations increasing large tax breaks, while VAT rises and those with the lowest incomes foot the bill for the Bankers greed. This picture is being played out again and again throughout the world. It highlights the fact that Globalization is only making a select few rich, while the majority gets poorer, and as Jones' states, this race to the bottom cannot continue.
This is not just about the UK, it is a portrait of injustice that has gone unchecked for far too long.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 7, 2016
I should have looked more closely at the title, particularly the second part of it.
Is “Chav” a derogatory term of abuse? Yes, quite often. But it can also be something of a badge of honour, rather like an ASBO.
I was for the Chav and Owen Jones to begin with, very much so. I was finding the book both interesting and enlightening. I'm also a sucker for the underdog and it's easy to resent treatment meted out by the ruling elite. Lots of credible examples of this here.
But I began to find it over long, repetitive, pompous and preachy..in fact OJ's perception of the Chav, similarly, anyone remotely to the right of Karl Marx, began to make my nipples itch. But I still gave it 3.
Is “Chav” a derogatory term of abuse? Yes, quite often. But it can also be something of a badge of honour, rather like an ASBO.
I was for the Chav and Owen Jones to begin with, very much so. I was finding the book both interesting and enlightening. I'm also a sucker for the underdog and it's easy to resent treatment meted out by the ruling elite. Lots of credible examples of this here.
But I began to find it over long, repetitive, pompous and preachy..in fact OJ's perception of the Chav, similarly, anyone remotely to the right of Karl Marx, began to make my nipples itch. But I still gave it 3.
October 8, 2017
A decent analysis of the media views of 'benefit scroungers' and the like. The commentary on how private schools, moneyed middle class parents etc offer an unfair advantage for some children definitely struck a chord for me. That was something I saw as I went through a state education and then to a prestigious university where I realised how wide the gaps between the classes were. However, the explanations of what working class/underclass life is like didn't really ring true for me. Maybe it's just a question of geography.
I'm from a predominantly white-working class town in the North East of England, where 'chavs' are called 'charvers'. Charvers seem to be a different breed to anything represented in this book. They wear the same sort of clothes to one another. If I mention Berghaus jackets and Rockport shoes, I bet that will ring a bell for anyone in that area. They use a broader version of the local accent with a lot of slang. There is lots of drug taking and a higher level of crime (at least perceived by me) than in other sub sections of the local community. This is not what it means to be working class. Some of these people worked and some didn't. These people drove me insane as a teenager, but looking back I have a different perspective. They were often people from disadvantaged backgrounds, who didn't have much to look forward to in life so they found a group of people where they felt like they could belong. Charvers seemed to have no ambition in life but to get the latest in tacky Burberry and annoy people by loitering around the local shopping centres, but the working class families I grew up with were completely different. They just wanted to earn enough to pay the bills, see their children were comfortable and enjoy spending time with their friends and family.
Instead of demonising this group of people, maybe we should understand why they exist. This book goes into depth about the closure of industries like the shipyards and pits which left many people out of work with no prospects of getting another. This was the main cause of the 'charver' lifestyle I saw growing up in one of these towns that used to have a pit as the main employer. Now it's poorly paid retail work and crap call centre jobs. Even if you do well in school and manage to go to university, you're still at a disadvantage from the middle or upper classes whose parents have 'contacts' and enough money to support them while they go off and do unpaid work experience to pad out their CV.
I'd recommend this to anyone-we need to look beyond the headlines of the tabloids and dig a bit deeper to address the social issues we have in this country.
I'm from a predominantly white-working class town in the North East of England, where 'chavs' are called 'charvers'. Charvers seem to be a different breed to anything represented in this book. They wear the same sort of clothes to one another. If I mention Berghaus jackets and Rockport shoes, I bet that will ring a bell for anyone in that area. They use a broader version of the local accent with a lot of slang. There is lots of drug taking and a higher level of crime (at least perceived by me) than in other sub sections of the local community. This is not what it means to be working class. Some of these people worked and some didn't. These people drove me insane as a teenager, but looking back I have a different perspective. They were often people from disadvantaged backgrounds, who didn't have much to look forward to in life so they found a group of people where they felt like they could belong. Charvers seemed to have no ambition in life but to get the latest in tacky Burberry and annoy people by loitering around the local shopping centres, but the working class families I grew up with were completely different. They just wanted to earn enough to pay the bills, see their children were comfortable and enjoy spending time with their friends and family.
Instead of demonising this group of people, maybe we should understand why they exist. This book goes into depth about the closure of industries like the shipyards and pits which left many people out of work with no prospects of getting another. This was the main cause of the 'charver' lifestyle I saw growing up in one of these towns that used to have a pit as the main employer. Now it's poorly paid retail work and crap call centre jobs. Even if you do well in school and manage to go to university, you're still at a disadvantage from the middle or upper classes whose parents have 'contacts' and enough money to support them while they go off and do unpaid work experience to pad out their CV.
I'd recommend this to anyone-we need to look beyond the headlines of the tabloids and dig a bit deeper to address the social issues we have in this country.
August 26, 2018
I have never been so glad to see the end of a book. I can not believe this rag has made it into its third edition! It is 269 pages of ill-researched ranting that starts with the basic false premise that chavs and working class people are one and the same thing, and conveniently ignores the fact that most sane-minded people can see they're separate. Thus this whole book, rather than being a credible study of class politics, comes across as a narky little rant about how snooty middle class people are. I wish, at the very beginning of his writing this book, someone had said, "Woah woah woah, Owen! You do realise the most normal people don't hate the working class, right?"
Possibly aware of its ranting register, Jones attempts to lend his work some "authority" by appealing to quotes from fellow left-leaning journalist Johann Hari who is famous for his journalistic malpractice and editing his critics' Wikipedia pages. Reliable. I guess Jones figured that if he quotes enough times from Hari and Wilkinson & Pickett (of Spirit Level fame) people might assume he did some actually research rather than just button-mashing at his laptop for hours on end.
All in all, it's lazy reverse snobbery cloaked in a tired critique of Thatcherism - a political understanding clearly inherited from his radical left-wing family rather than gleaned from any serious study. (If there has been any, he hasn't thought to include it here.) Don't get me wrong, I'm not exactly a rampant neo-liberal but I do at least accept that the picture is not as black and white as Jones makes it: the closure of the mines, though unfortunate, cannot be blamed for every social and political problem thereafter, nor does moaning about it constitute a credible solution.
But the fact is, Jones doesn't need to care about facts, research or genuine political solutions. He is a journalist; he deals in grab quotes and hot air, and - let's face it - that is all this book really is.
Possibly aware of its ranting register, Jones attempts to lend his work some "authority" by appealing to quotes from fellow left-leaning journalist Johann Hari who is famous for his journalistic malpractice and editing his critics' Wikipedia pages. Reliable. I guess Jones figured that if he quotes enough times from Hari and Wilkinson & Pickett (of Spirit Level fame) people might assume he did some actually research rather than just button-mashing at his laptop for hours on end.
All in all, it's lazy reverse snobbery cloaked in a tired critique of Thatcherism - a political understanding clearly inherited from his radical left-wing family rather than gleaned from any serious study. (If there has been any, he hasn't thought to include it here.) Don't get me wrong, I'm not exactly a rampant neo-liberal but I do at least accept that the picture is not as black and white as Jones makes it: the closure of the mines, though unfortunate, cannot be blamed for every social and political problem thereafter, nor does moaning about it constitute a credible solution.
But the fact is, Jones doesn't need to care about facts, research or genuine political solutions. He is a journalist; he deals in grab quotes and hot air, and - let's face it - that is all this book really is.
February 20, 2017
Chavs tiene dos problemas: el primero es que la situación que Owen Jones describía en 2011 ha estallado como una olla a presión sin escape en 2017. El segundo, que las interpretaciones que se han hecho en España no me parecen las más adecuadas. Chavs es una descripción clara de por qué ciertos sectores de la clase obrera han votado Brexit y Trump: porque sienten que los partidos de "izquierdas" les han abandonado a su suerte y convertido en una caricatura que han terminado por aceptar.
Chavs no es una reivindicación de lo cani, es una explicación de que esa caricatura es falsa. Que la gente que vive en las ciudades desindustrializadas de Inglaterra no son unos monstruos racistas que solo piensan en drogas y sexo. Que un poco de paseo por esos sitios que despreciamos solo por la imagen que nos dan de ellos en Telecinco nos haría cambiar de opinión y darnos cuenta de que necesitan auxilio, no desdén y condescencia.
Y seis años después lo que se preveía ha terminado pasando. El blairismo que convirtió los restos de socialdemocracia en ese engendro a veces llamado socioliberalismo ha hecho que cada vez más gente abandone a los partidos que tradicionalmente defendían sus intereses. Algunos (muchos) hacia la abstención. Otros (menos) atraídos por los cantos de sirena de la ultraderecha. Lo interesante de Chavs es que hoy se lee como una explicación de la realidad. Hace seis años era Casandra clamando profecías a las que nadie hizo caso. Y lo peor es que no esto parece que solo acaba de empezar.
Chavs no es una reivindicación de lo cani, es una explicación de que esa caricatura es falsa. Que la gente que vive en las ciudades desindustrializadas de Inglaterra no son unos monstruos racistas que solo piensan en drogas y sexo. Que un poco de paseo por esos sitios que despreciamos solo por la imagen que nos dan de ellos en Telecinco nos haría cambiar de opinión y darnos cuenta de que necesitan auxilio, no desdén y condescencia.
Y seis años después lo que se preveía ha terminado pasando. El blairismo que convirtió los restos de socialdemocracia en ese engendro a veces llamado socioliberalismo ha hecho que cada vez más gente abandone a los partidos que tradicionalmente defendían sus intereses. Algunos (muchos) hacia la abstención. Otros (menos) atraídos por los cantos de sirena de la ultraderecha. Lo interesante de Chavs es que hoy se lee como una explicación de la realidad. Hace seis años era Casandra clamando profecías a las que nadie hizo caso. Y lo peor es que no esto parece que solo acaba de empezar.
February 8, 2012
I need more stars! This was a three and half rounded up, an entertaining, clever, and passionate book about something that the 'left' should already know but due to middle class bias seems to forget over and over again. Which shows just how problematic the 'left' is. Anyone who's grown up poor will find this all too familiar, so I personally am angry that we still need books like this to help call out problematic caricatures and prejudices, and happy that someone is doing so. It's full of easily accessible facts and figures and information and that's all good, though you can't help but wince at the Johann Hari quotes. So for what it does it's great and hopefully has made a lot of people really think about things. I wished first for more nuance around issues of race, which could have been in here, and second, thoughts on how to engage more critically with working-class culture itself, and ways in which to build movement in this new world of employment and neolieralism. But I think that would be another book really...
March 6, 2021
this was a really insightful book all about class structures in the uk and how the working class have been demonised over the years i.e. by the media, by politicians etc. this book was first published in 2010, and while some things have obviously (and thankfully) changed since then, it was quite depressing to realise that there hasn’t been as much change as we’d like to believe. i read this book quite slowly over a few months because it was quite dense at times, including a fair few statistics and often some political jargon. the more political aspects of the book were explained well, but i do think you’ll need to have some understanding of british politics going into this book. but as i said, it was a great analysis of prejudice against the working class and at how deeply embedded class politics is in britain, and i learnt a lot from it!
May 27, 2021
i cannot recommend this book enough - everyone needs to read it!
chapter 4 in particular was very interesting as it touched on influences of tv and literature on the construction of the ‘chav’ caricature.
would also like to apologise to all those who i’ve promised to lend my copy to - there is now a rather long queue as i’ve been singing the praises of this book since i picked it up.
chapter 4 in particular was very interesting as it touched on influences of tv and literature on the construction of the ‘chav’ caricature.
would also like to apologise to all those who i’ve promised to lend my copy to - there is now a rather long queue as i’ve been singing the praises of this book since i picked it up.
September 29, 2014
Everyone should read this book.
It makes me want to hold this book up and say "Yes This is what is happening all around us, to us!"
From classist snobbery I've dealt with in my life, to a real fear of what the future and politics has in store. This book certainly struck a chord with me.
It makes me want to hold this book up and say "Yes This is what is happening all around us, to us!"
From classist snobbery I've dealt with in my life, to a real fear of what the future and politics has in store. This book certainly struck a chord with me.
July 16, 2016
A solid three stars however. Need some time to think this over before I finalise feelings.
April 5, 2019
Las estrellas de este libro han sido subiendo, bajando y volviendo a subir todo a lo largo de su lectura. Una vez terminado, sólo puede decir que me parece una lectura muy necesaria para abrir espacios de reflexión acerca de todo lo que hemos perdido junto con nuestro sentimiento de clase. Porque sí: ahora mismo hemos perdido todo eso que Jones comenta, por mucho que aún estemos a tiempo (espero) de recuperarlo.
April 5, 2016
Margaret Thatcher y el thatcherismo fueron peores para el Reino Unido que los bombardeos de los alemanes.
El libro realiza una ácida crítica del fenómeno de la lucha de clases tal y como se plantea desde la derecha. Esto es, mientras con una mano la derecha afirma que el concepto de las clases es un concepto divisivo y malo, pasado de moda y que todos somos clase media, con la otra mano se aseguran de que las desigualdades entre clases sean mayores, y que además la clase trabajadora sea culpada y responsabilizada de su situación, causada por las políticas de la derecha. Y Gran Bretaña es un excelente ejemplo del destrozo social que causan las políticas neoliberales.
Es un libro estupendo para ponerse de muy mala leche, sobre todo porque uno ve los paralelismos (la traición de la socialdemocracia, aquí el PSOE, allí los laboristas), la estúpida pretensión de que para ser más competitivos en industria lo que hay que hacer es destruir la industria, y ver que el aznarato y ahora el gobierno de Rajoy son más de las políticas que se aplicaron 20 años antes en Reino Unido con unos resultados desastrosos.
Dos apuntes sacados de "Chavs: la demonización de la clase obrera", de Owen Jones.
Cuando Thatcher llegó al poder en 1979 había 5 millones de pobres en Reino Unido. En 1992, tras tres mandatos, había catorce millones de pobres en Reino Unido. El tejido industrial había sido destruido. Explicad cómo eso es bueno para el pueblo británico. Pista: no lo es.
De acuerdo con la Fundación para una Nueva Economía (NEF, 2009), el valor social de diferentes trabajos se puede calcular. Una limpiadora de hospital cobra a menudo el salario mínimo. Sin embargo, generan más de 10 libras de valor social por libra pagada de salario. Un basurero o persona que trabaje en reciclado genera 12 libras por libra de salario.
En cambio, un banquero de la City destruye 7 libras de valor social por cada libra de salario (salarios muy altos). Los ejecutivos publicitarios destruyen 11 libras por libra de salario. Puedes tener un trabajo mal pagado aunque tu contribución sea decisiva. Puedes ganar mucho dinero aunque tu trabajo sea destruir las vidas de otros.
Luego hablamos de lo bien que gestiona todo la derecha.
Yo considero este libro imprescindible.
El libro realiza una ácida crítica del fenómeno de la lucha de clases tal y como se plantea desde la derecha. Esto es, mientras con una mano la derecha afirma que el concepto de las clases es un concepto divisivo y malo, pasado de moda y que todos somos clase media, con la otra mano se aseguran de que las desigualdades entre clases sean mayores, y que además la clase trabajadora sea culpada y responsabilizada de su situación, causada por las políticas de la derecha. Y Gran Bretaña es un excelente ejemplo del destrozo social que causan las políticas neoliberales.
Es un libro estupendo para ponerse de muy mala leche, sobre todo porque uno ve los paralelismos (la traición de la socialdemocracia, aquí el PSOE, allí los laboristas), la estúpida pretensión de que para ser más competitivos en industria lo que hay que hacer es destruir la industria, y ver que el aznarato y ahora el gobierno de Rajoy son más de las políticas que se aplicaron 20 años antes en Reino Unido con unos resultados desastrosos.
Dos apuntes sacados de "Chavs: la demonización de la clase obrera", de Owen Jones.
Cuando Thatcher llegó al poder en 1979 había 5 millones de pobres en Reino Unido. En 1992, tras tres mandatos, había catorce millones de pobres en Reino Unido. El tejido industrial había sido destruido. Explicad cómo eso es bueno para el pueblo británico. Pista: no lo es.
De acuerdo con la Fundación para una Nueva Economía (NEF, 2009), el valor social de diferentes trabajos se puede calcular. Una limpiadora de hospital cobra a menudo el salario mínimo. Sin embargo, generan más de 10 libras de valor social por libra pagada de salario. Un basurero o persona que trabaje en reciclado genera 12 libras por libra de salario.
En cambio, un banquero de la City destruye 7 libras de valor social por cada libra de salario (salarios muy altos). Los ejecutivos publicitarios destruyen 11 libras por libra de salario. Puedes tener un trabajo mal pagado aunque tu contribución sea decisiva. Puedes ganar mucho dinero aunque tu trabajo sea destruir las vidas de otros.
Luego hablamos de lo bien que gestiona todo la derecha.
Yo considero este libro imprescindible.
Read
September 14, 2011U.S. readers may be surprised by the very many similarities between the stereotypes of white working class Britons and the stereotypes of African Americans. Seeing how these particular stereotypes are deployed in the U.K. to cover up the effects of deindustrialization, rationalize the demolition of public housing, and blame an ostensible "culture of poverty" for the natural outcomes of late consumer capitalism may make it easier for people in the U.S. to deconstruct the lies that seem to many to be self-evident truths here. Indeed, I used examples from this book in a lesson on stereotyping the very night that I finished this book, and--after they got over being shocked that "white" people are stereotyped in these ways--students were then better able to see the function of such stereotypes in covering up and justifying economic inequalities. But, be warned, this is a U.K. book, written for a U.K. audience, so there's quite a bit of detail concerning U.K. politics. If you're not already familiar with Thatcherism and its ongoing effects, do read those parts of this book, because it's happening here, with Wisconsin just the latest example. But U.S. readers who are not political scientists may want to skim-skip some of the sections dealing with the details of U.K. party politics.
May 7, 2012
In a review of my novel, Citizen Zero, it was asked what had happened that the unemployed became so criminalised? At the time, Chavs by Owen Jones didn't exist, but today I can point to the book as a ready answer to the question (and indeed, a part of the 'backstory'.
Jones subtitles his book 'the demonization of the working class' -- but that isn't far removed from criminalising them. For as long as I can remember, debate has raged over welfare reform and 'scroungers' milking the system, of the need to create real jobs that allow people to leave benefits, of so-called benefit dependency. Over the years, it's moved from some -- admittedly heated -- debate towards shrill moralising and contemptuous slander. Under this current coalition Government, it has reached a terrifying peak.
The brutalising of the weak and voiceless by the strong and powerful has created a noxious atmosphere that is at once hateful and resentful of the poor -- working or otherwise -- but at the same time triumphant and gloating at the misfortunes and prejudice that has been heaped upon them over the years. In a sense, the working class has been turned into a hate figure, and a stick with which to beat 'respectable' society. The latter being those who have been cajoled or browbeaten into perceiving themselves as middle class -- or be forever reviled as 'chav'. That they have rather more in common with their cloth-capped, factory-working ancestors (their 'factory' being the admin mill of the modern open plan office), is smothered by the presentation of the chav caricature.
I shan't venture into the arguments here; Jones does an admirable job in his book and any attempt I make would be but a pale imitation that would hardly do Jones's thesis any justice. Suffice to say that this book is about social justice -- a call to arms to challenge both the chav caricature and the insidious divide between rich and poor that has widened over the last three decades. Indeed, Jones makes it clear that the rise of the 'chav' is part of the ideological control mechanism that has justified the rich becoming richer, the poor becoming poorer and the nebulous 'squeezed middle' being squeezed all the more.
Jones doesn't shy away from raising the spectre of class war -- but he makes a strong case for it being a one-sided battle. Far from the working class, or the Left, waging a concerted war, it is the rich and powerful that are engaged in a campaign of class warfare -- to the detriment of our democratic society. Shamefully, the Labour Party has been a willing ally of the wealthy few against the interests and concerns of the many.
What has helped to give rise to the 'chav' caricature, he argues, is the onslaught against the working class that has shattered many of its communities, its institutions and its sense of collective identity. As the organised institutions of the Left have become weakened, so the liberal intelligentsia have stepped forth to adopt the mantle of the progressive left (think the Guardian newspaper here), but in essence this progressive liberalism is little more than a 'highbrow' take on good old Tory noblesse oblige. Hardly progressive, then.
Chavs strives to make sense of the bitter process that has seen the working class turned from 'salt of the earth' to 'scum of the earth': it's a story of recession, and devastated industry, of whole communities dumped on the dole and abandoned, of concerted political strategies designed to subordinate the British economy -- and society -- to the desires of the City. Above all, it's an exploration of a bitter hatred of working class collective identity, of their cultural institutions, of their trade unions, of their very collective strength, (all of which might counterbalance the excesses of the aristo-oligarch-financial matrix that today so dominates our society) -- and the concerted effort to smash them into the dust.
Jones lays bare the makings of our modern 21st Century society -- and it's not pretty. If you care about living in a just and fair society, if you want to understand modern Britain, then Chavs is essential reading.
Mark Cantrell,
Author of Citizen Zero
Jones subtitles his book 'the demonization of the working class' -- but that isn't far removed from criminalising them. For as long as I can remember, debate has raged over welfare reform and 'scroungers' milking the system, of the need to create real jobs that allow people to leave benefits, of so-called benefit dependency. Over the years, it's moved from some -- admittedly heated -- debate towards shrill moralising and contemptuous slander. Under this current coalition Government, it has reached a terrifying peak.
The brutalising of the weak and voiceless by the strong and powerful has created a noxious atmosphere that is at once hateful and resentful of the poor -- working or otherwise -- but at the same time triumphant and gloating at the misfortunes and prejudice that has been heaped upon them over the years. In a sense, the working class has been turned into a hate figure, and a stick with which to beat 'respectable' society. The latter being those who have been cajoled or browbeaten into perceiving themselves as middle class -- or be forever reviled as 'chav'. That they have rather more in common with their cloth-capped, factory-working ancestors (their 'factory' being the admin mill of the modern open plan office), is smothered by the presentation of the chav caricature.
I shan't venture into the arguments here; Jones does an admirable job in his book and any attempt I make would be but a pale imitation that would hardly do Jones's thesis any justice. Suffice to say that this book is about social justice -- a call to arms to challenge both the chav caricature and the insidious divide between rich and poor that has widened over the last three decades. Indeed, Jones makes it clear that the rise of the 'chav' is part of the ideological control mechanism that has justified the rich becoming richer, the poor becoming poorer and the nebulous 'squeezed middle' being squeezed all the more.
Jones doesn't shy away from raising the spectre of class war -- but he makes a strong case for it being a one-sided battle. Far from the working class, or the Left, waging a concerted war, it is the rich and powerful that are engaged in a campaign of class warfare -- to the detriment of our democratic society. Shamefully, the Labour Party has been a willing ally of the wealthy few against the interests and concerns of the many.
What has helped to give rise to the 'chav' caricature, he argues, is the onslaught against the working class that has shattered many of its communities, its institutions and its sense of collective identity. As the organised institutions of the Left have become weakened, so the liberal intelligentsia have stepped forth to adopt the mantle of the progressive left (think the Guardian newspaper here), but in essence this progressive liberalism is little more than a 'highbrow' take on good old Tory noblesse oblige. Hardly progressive, then.
Chavs strives to make sense of the bitter process that has seen the working class turned from 'salt of the earth' to 'scum of the earth': it's a story of recession, and devastated industry, of whole communities dumped on the dole and abandoned, of concerted political strategies designed to subordinate the British economy -- and society -- to the desires of the City. Above all, it's an exploration of a bitter hatred of working class collective identity, of their cultural institutions, of their trade unions, of their very collective strength, (all of which might counterbalance the excesses of the aristo-oligarch-financial matrix that today so dominates our society) -- and the concerted effort to smash them into the dust.
Jones lays bare the makings of our modern 21st Century society -- and it's not pretty. If you care about living in a just and fair society, if you want to understand modern Britain, then Chavs is essential reading.
Mark Cantrell,
Author of Citizen Zero
February 3, 2012
Chavs
A very readable and fact-filled and interesting, if sometimes rather TOO geared toward academia, book about working class, and class in general in UK today. I guess “chav” is a fairly derogatory term for a poor person or working class redneck type person…so derogatory that it would be equivalent to saying nigger in the wrong place in usa, that is you would get your ass kicked if not killed. But also as nigger, it is used as a “funny” term of stereotype by pop culture, and used as an inword by poor working rednecks, yahoos, yokels, deadend boys etc…
But the book is really about how a class of people who far outnumber the “1 %” or politicos, and the so called representative government, are surprisingly treated like cattle, dismissed, austered, ignored, exploited etc etc etc. good book if one is interested in this, though too bad it is just about UK , or maybe rather England, and not much at all about Scotland, or Ireland or usa or Canada or Jamaica etc. but anyway, well worth the read. Here’s a quote from the conclusion:
“The demonization of the working class is the ridiculing of the conquered by the conqueror. Over the last thirty years, the power of working-class people has been driven out of the workplace, the media, the political establishment, and from society as a whole. Ruling elites once quaked at the threat of working-class boots stomping towards Downing Street, of a resolute mass brandishing red flags and dog-eared copies of The Communist Manifesto. Back in the 1970’s, right-wingers routinely complained that the trade unions were the real power in the land. Surreal as it now seems, it was the MIGHT of the working class that was once mocked and despised. But, today, with their power smashed into pieces, the working class can safely be insulted as tracksuit-wearing drunken layabouts with a soft spot for Enoch Powell. Feeble, feckless, rude, perhaps----but certainly not dangerous.”
As goes England so goes us a.
A very readable and fact-filled and interesting, if sometimes rather TOO geared toward academia, book about working class, and class in general in UK today. I guess “chav” is a fairly derogatory term for a poor person or working class redneck type person…so derogatory that it would be equivalent to saying nigger in the wrong place in usa, that is you would get your ass kicked if not killed. But also as nigger, it is used as a “funny” term of stereotype by pop culture, and used as an inword by poor working rednecks, yahoos, yokels, deadend boys etc…
But the book is really about how a class of people who far outnumber the “1 %” or politicos, and the so called representative government, are surprisingly treated like cattle, dismissed, austered, ignored, exploited etc etc etc. good book if one is interested in this, though too bad it is just about UK , or maybe rather England, and not much at all about Scotland, or Ireland or usa or Canada or Jamaica etc. but anyway, well worth the read. Here’s a quote from the conclusion:
“The demonization of the working class is the ridiculing of the conquered by the conqueror. Over the last thirty years, the power of working-class people has been driven out of the workplace, the media, the political establishment, and from society as a whole. Ruling elites once quaked at the threat of working-class boots stomping towards Downing Street, of a resolute mass brandishing red flags and dog-eared copies of The Communist Manifesto. Back in the 1970’s, right-wingers routinely complained that the trade unions were the real power in the land. Surreal as it now seems, it was the MIGHT of the working class that was once mocked and despised. But, today, with their power smashed into pieces, the working class can safely be insulted as tracksuit-wearing drunken layabouts with a soft spot for Enoch Powell. Feeble, feckless, rude, perhaps----but certainly not dangerous.”
As goes England so goes us a.
July 27, 2012
I'd been wanting to read this book since watching an incredulous Jones (along with Drea Say Mitchell) trying to counter David Starkey as the latter embarrassed himself on Newsnight last August. I caught that broadcast live that night and actually have used it with my A level English Language classes to show misperceptions about Black English, Creole in general and Multicultural London English (MLE), also known as Multi-Ethnic Youth Dialect (MYED). However, I managed to get to reading Jones' book last month.
As Jones himself admits in a new introduction, the title itself is a bit misleading. Okay, the subtitle works just fine, as the book is an excellent expose on the demonisation of the working classes. However, it's not about 'chavs' per se or chav culture; it's more about the representation of working class individuals as 'chavs', particularly as they're often misrepresented in the media and by politicians. Jones certainly blames (with plenty of evidence) Thatcher's government, but he's happy to single out issues with Labour, especially New Labour. He'll harangue Thatcher, Major, Duncan Smith etc. all the way to Cameron, Osborne and Gove (there's more on the Coalition government in the new introduction, of course, than in the actual book), but he'll also call out Blair, Brown and Milliband (either one) when they deserve it. Yes, Jones makes it quite clear that he's not a Tory (nor am I, by the way), but party doesn't matter to him when misrepresentation occurs, as well it shouldn't.
Personally, I'm pleased that someone like Jones is airing these views in public. This voice needs to be heard.
As Jones himself admits in a new introduction, the title itself is a bit misleading. Okay, the subtitle works just fine, as the book is an excellent expose on the demonisation of the working classes. However, it's not about 'chavs' per se or chav culture; it's more about the representation of working class individuals as 'chavs', particularly as they're often misrepresented in the media and by politicians. Jones certainly blames (with plenty of evidence) Thatcher's government, but he's happy to single out issues with Labour, especially New Labour. He'll harangue Thatcher, Major, Duncan Smith etc. all the way to Cameron, Osborne and Gove (there's more on the Coalition government in the new introduction, of course, than in the actual book), but he'll also call out Blair, Brown and Milliband (either one) when they deserve it. Yes, Jones makes it quite clear that he's not a Tory (nor am I, by the way), but party doesn't matter to him when misrepresentation occurs, as well it shouldn't.
Personally, I'm pleased that someone like Jones is airing these views in public. This voice needs to be heard.
August 4, 2014
I am not an economist. My knowledge of economics and politics weren't spectacular and pretty mediocre, however reading this superb, excellently written book really was an eye opener. Not only does Owen Jones write eloquently and fluently, he links ideas perfectly in a way almost anyone can understand. His balanced, consistent and thorough use of statistics as well as expanding ideologies and digging into them, unearthing the roots provides brilliant reading as well as inciting attitude change, you'll find it challenging to argue with his structure and logic.
There were points where i didn't understand what was being said, so I had to consult those who were more experienced to explain various things, for example parts to do with fluctuations in the value of currency and it's effect on trade as well as some aspects on housing and taxes. Possibly these parts could've been explained to someone who did have very little knowledge like me, but this would be my only criticism.
Owen Jones writes angrily and passionately and I found myself feeling equally infuriated and sensing strong injustice that is going on towards a group in society that is marginalised so badly, there were moments where I thought, "Wow, that is so true, yet I've never actually realised as my own prejudices and ignorance had clouded my perceptions".
This is a must buy book for EVERYONE, because we are all viciously affected. It is a book you will not want to put down and is guaranteed to change you as a person.
There were points where i didn't understand what was being said, so I had to consult those who were more experienced to explain various things, for example parts to do with fluctuations in the value of currency and it's effect on trade as well as some aspects on housing and taxes. Possibly these parts could've been explained to someone who did have very little knowledge like me, but this would be my only criticism.
Owen Jones writes angrily and passionately and I found myself feeling equally infuriated and sensing strong injustice that is going on towards a group in society that is marginalised so badly, there were moments where I thought, "Wow, that is so true, yet I've never actually realised as my own prejudices and ignorance had clouded my perceptions".
This is a must buy book for EVERYONE, because we are all viciously affected. It is a book you will not want to put down and is guaranteed to change you as a person.
August 20, 2015
This book reminded me of Finnegan's Wake. It's very well written nonsense.
Jones is a very passionate and eloquent fellow but his relentless demonization of Margaret Thatcher and his endless blaming of her for the existence of today's British underclass, even though she left office 25 years ago, is both tedious and illogical. Jones is very one-eyed in his analysis of events in the 1970s and 1980s, most of which took place before he was born. But I was alive and sentient during these decades and I remember things very differently.
It would take a very long review to detail all of his errors but here are the lowlights: He refers to the Winter of Discontent as 'a folk tale' told by Conservatives. No Owen, it's a matter of historical fact. He repeats (ad nauseam) the notion that Thatcher deliberately destroyed traditional British industries. The reality is that she exposed them to the harsh winds of competition by removing unconditional taxpayer support and allowed them to sink or swim by their own merits in the marketplace. Traditional industries were dying all over the Western world in the 1970s and 1980s because of a variety of global economic changes. To blame Thatcher and neglect the larger forces at work - which Jones does entirely - is risible.
Jones also asserts that Thatcher deliberately pursued policies which would boost unemployment, when clearly for most politicians this would be akin to electoral suicide. He also claims, perhaps most laughably, that Thatcher was sympathetic to the old guard aristocracy within her own party, when every biography and other account of her premiership shows her to be in constant strife with them. She hated them because she disliked entrenched privilege and they hated her because she was a middle class parvenu and a woman. Although she made common cause with Jones's hated toffs in 1979 when she was new to office and need to consolidate power, as she cemented her position whenever possible she promoted within her Cabinet on merit. Need proof? Her preferred successor was John Major, the son of an itinerant circus clown. Sound aristocratic to you?
But enough of specifics, Jones' overarching theme is that the Conservatives were waging class war on the Unions, while the Unions were just talking about class war. This is news to those of us who suffered through endless militant union action under the regimes of Wilson, Heath and Callaghan. It was that militancy which brought Thatcher to power as the silent majority of Britons finally grew exasperated with the tyranny of the Union bosses, many of whom were far more militant than their own membership and ruthlessly suppressed voices of moderation within their own ranks. Leaders who were openly Marxist and who made common cause with the Kremlin. Those of us who saw the abuse of the open ballot and secondary picketing cannot take seriously Jones's assertion that it was only the upper class who were engaged in class warfare.
Jones is of course entitled to his opinions, but he is not entitled to his own facts, and this polemic is revisionist, one-sided nonsense. I know, because I was there. He wasn't.
Jones is a very passionate and eloquent fellow but his relentless demonization of Margaret Thatcher and his endless blaming of her for the existence of today's British underclass, even though she left office 25 years ago, is both tedious and illogical. Jones is very one-eyed in his analysis of events in the 1970s and 1980s, most of which took place before he was born. But I was alive and sentient during these decades and I remember things very differently.
It would take a very long review to detail all of his errors but here are the lowlights: He refers to the Winter of Discontent as 'a folk tale' told by Conservatives. No Owen, it's a matter of historical fact. He repeats (ad nauseam) the notion that Thatcher deliberately destroyed traditional British industries. The reality is that she exposed them to the harsh winds of competition by removing unconditional taxpayer support and allowed them to sink or swim by their own merits in the marketplace. Traditional industries were dying all over the Western world in the 1970s and 1980s because of a variety of global economic changes. To blame Thatcher and neglect the larger forces at work - which Jones does entirely - is risible.
Jones also asserts that Thatcher deliberately pursued policies which would boost unemployment, when clearly for most politicians this would be akin to electoral suicide. He also claims, perhaps most laughably, that Thatcher was sympathetic to the old guard aristocracy within her own party, when every biography and other account of her premiership shows her to be in constant strife with them. She hated them because she disliked entrenched privilege and they hated her because she was a middle class parvenu and a woman. Although she made common cause with Jones's hated toffs in 1979 when she was new to office and need to consolidate power, as she cemented her position whenever possible she promoted within her Cabinet on merit. Need proof? Her preferred successor was John Major, the son of an itinerant circus clown. Sound aristocratic to you?
But enough of specifics, Jones' overarching theme is that the Conservatives were waging class war on the Unions, while the Unions were just talking about class war. This is news to those of us who suffered through endless militant union action under the regimes of Wilson, Heath and Callaghan. It was that militancy which brought Thatcher to power as the silent majority of Britons finally grew exasperated with the tyranny of the Union bosses, many of whom were far more militant than their own membership and ruthlessly suppressed voices of moderation within their own ranks. Leaders who were openly Marxist and who made common cause with the Kremlin. Those of us who saw the abuse of the open ballot and secondary picketing cannot take seriously Jones's assertion that it was only the upper class who were engaged in class warfare.
Jones is of course entitled to his opinions, but he is not entitled to his own facts, and this polemic is revisionist, one-sided nonsense. I know, because I was there. He wasn't.
September 13, 2014
La lucha de clases la ganan los ricos cuando no nos queremos reconocer como clase trabajadora. La alarma que eleva Owen Jones respecto al Reino Unido es peligrosamente parecida a lo que se podría decir de Chile y la tendencia a que todos se crean de clase media.
Porque los trabajadores son aprovechadores, se reproducen sin control, son peligrosos, son básicamente flaites. Decirse de clase media es la declaración pública que nos alejaría de esa miseria.
Yo amo al Reino Unido, a su magnífico sistema de salud, a su dignidad, a sus artistas, pensadores y vecinos solidarios. El trabajo de Jones me interpela e invita a luchar contra el arribismo y la destrucción de nuestras clases trabajadoras minimizadas en ocupaciones donde sus habilidades son reducidas y su moral devastada. Como en todo libro sobre los vicios neoliberales aparece el ejemplo chileno y no es exagerado ver con claridad cómo las alertas sobre la creciente frivolidad, esnobismo, consumismo desvergonzado, apropiación burguesa de las tradiciones populares, explotación laboral, segregación y nula conciencia de clase, en Chile son realidad. Somos el ejemplo a no seguir.
The class struggle is won by the rich when we do not want to tag ourselves as working class. The alarm raised by Owen Jones respect to the United Kingdom is dangerously similar to the Chilean situation and its trend where everyone considers themselves as "middle class".
Because workers are freeloaders, they give birth uncontrollably, are dangerous, are basically "flaites" in Chilean or "chavs" in English. To self proclaim as middle class is a public statement that supposedly put us away from that misery.
I love the United Kingdom, its magnificent NHS, its dignity, its artists, thinkers and supportive neighbors. Jones' work challenges me and invites me to fight careerism and the destruction of our working class minimized in occupations where their skills are reduced and their morale devastated.
As in any book on neoliberalism the Chilean example appears and it is no exaggeration to see clearly how the alarms on levity, snobbery, shameless consumerism, bourgeois appropriation of popular traditions, labor exploitation, segregation and no class consciousness in Chile are reality. We are the example not to follow.
Porque los trabajadores son aprovechadores, se reproducen sin control, son peligrosos, son básicamente flaites. Decirse de clase media es la declaración pública que nos alejaría de esa miseria.
Yo amo al Reino Unido, a su magnífico sistema de salud, a su dignidad, a sus artistas, pensadores y vecinos solidarios. El trabajo de Jones me interpela e invita a luchar contra el arribismo y la destrucción de nuestras clases trabajadoras minimizadas en ocupaciones donde sus habilidades son reducidas y su moral devastada. Como en todo libro sobre los vicios neoliberales aparece el ejemplo chileno y no es exagerado ver con claridad cómo las alertas sobre la creciente frivolidad, esnobismo, consumismo desvergonzado, apropiación burguesa de las tradiciones populares, explotación laboral, segregación y nula conciencia de clase, en Chile son realidad. Somos el ejemplo a no seguir.
The class struggle is won by the rich when we do not want to tag ourselves as working class. The alarm raised by Owen Jones respect to the United Kingdom is dangerously similar to the Chilean situation and its trend where everyone considers themselves as "middle class".
Because workers are freeloaders, they give birth uncontrollably, are dangerous, are basically "flaites" in Chilean or "chavs" in English. To self proclaim as middle class is a public statement that supposedly put us away from that misery.
I love the United Kingdom, its magnificent NHS, its dignity, its artists, thinkers and supportive neighbors. Jones' work challenges me and invites me to fight careerism and the destruction of our working class minimized in occupations where their skills are reduced and their morale devastated.
As in any book on neoliberalism the Chilean example appears and it is no exaggeration to see clearly how the alarms on levity, snobbery, shameless consumerism, bourgeois appropriation of popular traditions, labor exploitation, segregation and no class consciousness in Chile are reality. We are the example not to follow.
March 20, 2013
I'll admit I was expecting to hate this book. When you're dealing with anti-social behaviour and street harassment on a day-to-day basis the last thing you need are bleeding-heart newspaper columns about how "they can't help it because they're poor" - complete with the not-so-flattering subtext that if you're on a low income then somehow you can't help being an obnoxious idiot. I was suspicious that 'Chavs' was going to be a longer version of this narrative, but I was reassured just from reading the preface. From there, Jones goes on to make a compelling case for media bias in the portrayal of working-class life.
While the book is good as far as it goes, it still fails to present a more positive image to counter the popular cliches. It's not enough just to identify a problem unless you've got something more useful to present as an alternative. Where are the good news stories, for example of people forming their own local groups and trying to make a difference in their communities? The people who don't fit the stereotypes? I'd like to see more of that in the sequel, please.
While the book is good as far as it goes, it still fails to present a more positive image to counter the popular cliches. It's not enough just to identify a problem unless you've got something more useful to present as an alternative. Where are the good news stories, for example of people forming their own local groups and trying to make a difference in their communities? The people who don't fit the stereotypes? I'd like to see more of that in the sequel, please.
June 19, 2014
A brilliant book. Owen Jones is probably the most inspiring figure in the British Left today. He absolutely nails the social and political changes that have taken place in this country over the last 35 years that have lead to a massive decline in the living standards, communities and levels of basic respect afforded the working class in the UK. They have been victimised, ignored and mocked for too long and now we're beginning to see the consequences with the rise of UKIP. I read this book in a state of gradually rising fury. Most of all I'm angry with the Labour party, who have utterly failed as a left wing party that is supposed to represent the interests of the working class. Today Ed Milliband has announced that one of his policies will be reducing the level of benefits young people can claim. Well done Ed. You're doing a great job of continuing the grand tradition of marginalising and victimising the poorest, most vulnerable members of our society.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 948 reviews