“…Cheap holidays, over-priced housing, educations that no longer buy security…
…[The middle classes] are the new proletariat, like factory workers a hundred years ago…
…Anyone earning less than £300,000 a year scarcely counts. You’re just a prole in a three-button suit…”
These lines from J.G. Ballard’s 2003 novel Millennium People were thought-provoking, yet not wholly convincing 21 years ago. They have, however, become more and more plausible with the passing of time. In a development whose causes and significance have been obscured by the reign of identity politics, the middle classes have been struggling to resist downward mobility and proletarianisation. It’s felt especially by the young as graduates have found themselves saddled with increasingly oppressive debt burdens while education and housing costs are soaring. Meanwhile, offshoring and automation have meant that middle-income jobs have become scarcer — resulting in something referred to online as “the overproduction of elites”. It’s a trend in which, according to a 2019 OECD report, “the middle class looks increasingly like a boat in rocky waters”.
None of this would have surprised Ballard. Right from the beginning of his career in the mid-Fifties, he was a close observer of the bourgeoisie: “society’s keel and anchor”. His typical protagonist is a doctor, psychiatrist, architect or TV producer — a comfortably middle-class professional. Ballard was among the first to note and analyse a significant change to middle-class life: the flight to the suburbs; the rise of an intensely moralistic illiberalism among some middle-class youth; the importance of home video, the camcorder and later the internet to the isolated suburban lifestyle; the bunkering of the upper middle class in gated communities.
By the early 2000s, Ballard was seeing evidence of increased disgruntlement and straitened circumstances among sections of the middle class — portents which he examined in Millennium People, his tale of a middle-class uprising in England’s capital. With a strong dose of black comedy, it represented a welcome return to the London terrain he’d mapped so evocatively in the Seventies. But the more realistic, “sociological” fiction of his late period was more concerned with “what is just about to happen in a given community”, and “trying to find the unconscious logic that runs below the surface”. As he put it: “there’s something odd going on [in society], and I explore that by writing a novel.”
There are certainly odd goings-on at Millennium People’s fictional estate of Chelsea Marina. What began as a dispute over rising maintenance fees has developed into something bigger and stranger. Now scores of residents, professionals of every stamp, are joining the rebellion — going on marches, disrupting events (an Earl’s Court cat show is ruined) and refusing to pay their bills. They seem to be protesting the ongoing impoverishment — both material and spiritual — of bourgeois life.
Into the estate, the police infiltrate psychologist David Markham: a deep-cover spy, so deep he’s unaware of his assignment. Markham has personal reasons for investigating the rebellion. Clues point to a connection between an unclaimed bombing at Heathrow, which killed his ex-wife Laura, and the middle-income insurgents of the Marina.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeSo much of this trend is a function of house prices. It doesnt need to be this bleak. Either allow housebuilding ( reduce regulations, planming requirements) or else massively curtail immigration. This doesnt happen because property owners ( especially those with 2nd,3rd, 4th etc.) houses like the upward pressure in house prices and employers like the cheap labour also. Then ngo’s etc badger governments to subsidise all sorts of housing subsidies pushing up rents and properties even more. This is the bleak present but I do think things will improve in say 10 years time and all this wasteful , parasytic system collapses when the government bond markets finally blow up ( probably in 4/5 years). A bit of chaos ( i pray for as little as possible) and we start over
Personally it’s getting to be nearly 20 years since first thinking this all has to collapse soon. I’ve no faith in it changing anymore – neofeudalism it will be.
Well goveenment bailed out banks but who will bail out government. Of course central banks can and do buy government bonds but there is only so long a chef can eat his own dinner. Id say 4/5 years
If government bond markets blow up, there will be more than abit of chaos, there will be a great depression. And it could last years, and then no one knows what happens later, it’s far from certain that everything will be fine. Economic chaos will lead to political chaos and misery for all.
Yeah but they will.in fact they are. Central banks buying the debt already. Thats the last step though. But yeah, could last a few years. I plan to enjoy them because you are probably correct
I’ve alway thought that the interesting thing about the middle class in the West was not only financial security, but the leisure time and disposable income to work on interests, reading, travelling, and hobbies. This luxury time, unavailable to previous generations, produced novels, ideas, inventions, political movements and an altogether richer culture. Working 70 hours a week to own a big car is not the real wealth of the middle class.
And not just that, in the 60s that middle class also wanted a cultural revolution, questioning power structures you are not supposed to be question. Perhaps elites found that the middle class should not be too wealthy and too genuinely well-educated or otherwise you cannot rule them.
When the average daily time spent on a mobile phone in the UK is over 3 hours, I’m deeply sceptical about this narrative that we all have far less leisure time. I’d suggest that we’re choosing to spend our free time and money in different (and perhaps less ultimately rewarding) ways.
I’ve always strongly believed the saying “We make time for what we want to make time for.” I can’t count how many times I’ve called up a friend and said “hey, let’s go grab dinner”, only to be rebuffed with “I just don’t have the time.” How about we just be honest instead, and say “I’m not in the mood.”
What is needed to enable a regeneration of a grown-up stable middle class is a huge shrinkage of the humanities and social science faculties of our Monasteries of Lefty Groupthink….. otherwise known as our institutions of ‘higher education’. The academy’s massive expansion over the last three decades has been a disaster. Its pied-piper hold on the ambitious young minds of the middle class – and future ‘opinion-forming’ elite – including crucially the teaching profession – has proceeded unchecked, such that its seductive virtue-signalling mentality has now taken hold in most graduate-entry professional walks of life. If a sane conservative administration ever gets power in the foreseable future (however doubtful that currently seems) this shrinkage should (along with purging the Lefty Civil Service) be its top priority. https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/p/invasion-of-the-virtue-signallers
Have you ever read Fredric Jameson who stated that “postmodernism is the cultural logical of late capitalism”? I think you cannot see the group think you are pointing out in isolation from the group think and dogma’s of neoliberalism.
Yes but in a comment thread like this you have to keep it simple or you end up with an unreadably long post. I am not familiar with Fredric Jameson per se but many political-philosophical thinkers (John Gray is one of my favorites) see Western Liberalism as always having carried the tragic seeds of its own eventual decay….and I have long since come to agree.
Agreed but who will have the stomach or even the thought processes to stop this nonsense in the future? The telegraph uncovered guidance for teachers to teach the “evils of whiteness” where “concepts including “meritocracy”, “objectivity” and “individualism” should be questioned.”. An entire curriculum based around Critical Race Theory, Gender Theory and other divisive and pseudoscientific postmodern nonsense is apparently rolling out
My son, after doing a term on slavery at primary school told me all about ignatius Sancho, a black 18th century former slave turned abolitionist. I’d never heard of him, and thought that was nice that that they are expanding knowledge on this. However, when I mentioned William Wilberforce, he had not a clue who I was talking about.
Really trying not to read too much into it but I really feel the brainwashing is well underway and Martin Luther King’s dream of everyone just being accepted for who they are (and all being beneficiaries of Enlightenment values and the wonders objective science has brought) is slowly being strangled.
So I ask again, what future politician would have the clarity of thought or bravery to repeal this idiocy after having been subjected to it for 20+ years? Not many I expect.
Kemi Badenoch.
Indeed, an important aspect is class consciousness and consciousness in general. Many see rampant inequality as a law of nature, as inevitable. They fall for the PR that this will create jobs, will trickle down and produce progress. And many are distracted by identitarian and cultural issues. However, a quick peek at our recent history shows that things can be different and things can be better. It that sense the middle class have their work already cut out for them.
According the to the Rand Corporation – not exactly a left wing think tank – about 50 trillion was transferred from the bottom to the top of society during the neoliberal period. After 2008 and 2020 this has probably gotten much worse. According to some researchers this wealth transfer was a conscious effort. Class conflict has been a reality for hundreds of years, I feel that during the postwar period the middle class fell asleep but elites didn’t.
I read a train of thought about the reason for the revolutions at the beginning of the 20th Century was because the middle class could not finance its children to live the lives their parents lived. The rich were rich and the poor. poor but a Doctor’s child could become a doctor and still be poor. And the children turned to the death of the rich and the stifling society they had created and with the help of the poor knocked it down. I don’t know, maybe you are right and the rich are so well defended it won’t happen again.
Real assets (as opposed to financial assets) used to be fairly widely distributed but are increasingly concentrating in fewer and fewer hands. Why?
A fiat debt-based money system allows the creation of of unlimited new money (aka credit) issued by certain legally privileged players (licensed banks) with immunity from the consequences of their actions. As George Cantillon observed three centuries ago, the first recipients of new money benefit at the expense of subsequent recipients who overvalue the currency in their trades and so give up more real resources to the earlier recipients than they would but for the fraud. Amongst the first recipients are governments and their connected institutions, so there are strong disincentives to fixing the problem.
In our fiat system, finance is rewarded disproportionately and rules over the production and trade it is supposed to serve and lubricate. This distortion of all the market signals leads to huge misallocation of resources and short term perspectives. That explains the excessive globalisation of supply chains and the abandonment of all redundancy that would buffer us against disruption of those supply chains.
Is there anything that could be done to reverse the problems? Yes. The most important corrective would be the removal of licensed banker (and government) legal immunity from the consequences of imprudence. Without this, banks would be unable to expand credit indefinitely, lest they become insolvent. Next, allow the marketplace, rather than bureaucratic “regulators” decide who is fit to be a banker.
One economic system regards the middle class as a vital feature. Most other economic systems regard the middle class as a bug to be eradicated.
Feudalism is the natural way of the world except where the Judeo-Christian ethic has prevailed, initially in Europe, then in the USA and other Anglophone countries. The Western expression of free-market capitalism builds a middle class of independent merchants and consumers who thrive by giving and receiving economic and cultural value. The middle class goals of home ownership and annual holidays are regarded as “a good life” but become increasingly unobtainable when government removes incentives to build your own career by maximizing public employment over private employment and creating a vast dependent class. Feudalism returns because “virtue” becomes synonymous with running other people’s lives instead of letting people run their own. Feudalism is never virtuous, though it pretends to be.
Excellent short piece on a crucial dilemma. Our new feudal lords (the political/corporate managerial elite) are clearly content to see the troublesome middle class decline, but they are perhaps in for a spot of trouble. We shall see. Soon enough.
Ages since I’ve read Ballard. Kotkin’s work looks very worthwhile.
We need to distinguish between the upper and lower middle classes.
The former have massively enriched themselves at the expense of the latter.
The article does identify a disturbing trend. I suppose if governments were to be elected by aggrieved middle class voters in a sufficient number of economically mid range countries with significant military assets as well as a determination to control tax evading capital flows then a lot could be done to eliminate our future feudal masters – suddenly their financial assets disappear, their tax havens are neutralised or even destroyed by a naval flotilla or cyber attack. Their super yatchts mysteriously sunk by submarines seemingly from nowhere and their private jets shot down..their private islands besieged, their professional lackeys – lawyers, bankers, retired politicians collecting their blood money for services rendered, even concierges imprisoned for re-education etc etc – a yeoman revolt like Wat Tyler’s half hearted insufficiently lethal attempt to remove Richard the Second whom they had in the cross hairs of their long bows – but successful this time. Just a thought…
As a student history, one of the consistent themes was the rise of the Middle class. If this is now ceasing then at least one part of history is coming to the end.
From now on, the fall of the Middle class!
History teaches us that class, or societal structures in general, change over time and will continue to do so. Whilst the prominence of “the middle class” may be coming to an end, even if that means a return to a kind of neo-feudalism, eventually other groups – named sections of society – will arise
The neo-bourgeoise? Who knows? No-one does till it happens, and it could be something we’ve yet to even.imagiine.
The rent seekers have to go
Where?
The Job Centre?
A hole in the ground
Thank you Paul for going a bit further than many articles that throw some existing statement together from other sources but go no further in thought. I enjoyed this enough to read it twice. Plus it’s rekindled an interest in Ballard.
Great article. The quote below is key to me – I’ve never really understood why the young were generally in favour of staying in the EU, with migration to drive down their wages. Perhaps it was just the middle class that didn’t see it, given that the effect of migration was happening to the working class? But even so, the vilification of Brexit voters shows just how much BS has been swallowed.
“it’s true that the new radical Leftist beliefs win plenty of adherents from the working and lower middle classes. But it’s hard to escape the conclusion that, for those supporters, such beliefs are a form of self-harm.”
I think a lot of people, young ones especially, could see the benefits of being in the EU, but they couldn’t see the costs. There could be many who accept low incomes and precarious futures in exchange for the freedom to move where they want when they want. What they don’t see is the cost of that freedom (the low income etc), would prevent them enjoying the benefits.
Yes, the costs of immigration and globalisation in general have been denied so they don’t see them, or realise how enormous those costs are.
It was an illusion. How many people relocated to Europe for work? A tiny proportion.
I was actually one of them in a sense, as I was asked to go to France and Germany occasionally. But they were only temporary gigs, and could still be done now.
But for most, apart from travel and holidays, the freedom to move and work was overwhelmingly from poorer Eastern countries to here and others in the West
My two cents – those beliefs are largely based on feelings. We’re talking about people who have been marinated in class warfare, the oppressed/oppressor binary, and similar expressions of victimology. The poor, woebegone, bedraggled migrants are presented as a noble suffering class seeking a better life, as if their influx will not affect anyone else, which speaks to another point – the erosion of critical thinking skills and ability.
Spot on; but the super wealthy and their political catspaws will continue to push their narrative to appeal to people’s feelings and steer their thinking away from the facts.
I don’t know any working class people who have swallowed the rubbish of the radical and aggressive Leftist beliefs. Literally no one. And I am working class and move among the same.
None of them either can stand Starmer by the way.
Analysis by anecdote! The Red Wall seats did actually revert to Labour!
I suppose on this basis we might say that we know “literally no one” who voted either Conservative OR Labour in the last election! And obviously the other parties gained far fewer votes, so nobody can have voted for them either. So our conclusion might be that nobody voted for any political party!
Come on, this is a pretty obvious point, although people constantly transgress it on this forum: if you know or talk to people who you get on with, they are more likely than not to agree with you on many issues, and be unrepresentative of the wider population.
Indeed, I never fail to be astonished by the people I meet who, having been forced by the housing crisis to live in caravans, continue to be vocal in their support for open borders and continuous mass immigration.
One of the paradoxes of modern politics is how to a very large extent Left and Right positions on EU membership have reversed in only a few decades. Only Jeremy Corbyn represented a pale reflection of a once strong tradition which of course included Tony Benn, Peter Shore and Michael Foot.
But to place EU membership in the frame of immigration seems almost quaint today, since the Conservative Party under Johnson decided to triple the levels of legal migration following Brexit!
The young are attracted by the wider, more exotic, dating market.
If the ‘middle classes’ are on the wain in the West, they look to be in the ascendant in the East.
Where will the twain meet?
At a wage a little above that of the utterly impoverished working class.
Nah. The middle class isn’t just about the level of income. It is about the level of independence. The rising ‘middle class’ in the East may be able to afford cars and houses, but they are slaves to the governments and corporations.
That is a very valid point.
So true!
Nah, you’re thinking in the “Western” box. A ‘middle class’ is any group which can be identified in such a way, without Western norms applied. It’s not even about Western income levels (D. Roberts).
Most of the western middle class are also slaves to the global corporations and government elites, they are not nearly as independent as they may believe.
Very few of them can actually afford houses. You’ll barely see a residential house in South Korea (which is I believe typical of east Asia). It’s all ultra high density mid rise apartments with no gardens. The quality of life:income ratio isn’t that attractive for most Europeans.
For some reason this reminded me how the planners for the American invasion of Iraq included plans to facilitate looting of its history museums by opening its doors to eradicate its “cultural identity“ and reduce resistance. Little did the idiots know how little these secular things mattered to the Iraqi identity,
I guess destruction of Tate Modern would mean something at least to left wing liberal types in London in contrast.
RE: the looting of the Iraqi museum. Never attribute to conspiracy events that can be explained by incompetence.
I enjoyed the article but I’m puzzled: isn’t talking about the disappearance of the middle class on the same spectrum as deploring the fact that 50% of the population is below average?
A very thought provoking article. I see it as a Socialist vs Capitalist battle which Capitalism must win if we are to avoid dependency and decline . Sadly however the advocates of Socialism now predominate. We need more and better leaders ( ie politicians) on the Capitalist side.
It took 100 years for Argentina to descend deep enough before the electorate finally understood the need for Milei, there is no reason to suppose it won’t take us just as long.
John Komlos (2015?) The Hollowing Out of the Middle Class.
There’s always an elite. Presumably, the landed gentry became wealthy in the first place by doing things better than their competitors.
As we become more educated, the cleverest, most able and most talented rise to the top and form the meritocracy,
Unless the new meritocracy is better or more competitive at producing and distributing things, there will be a serious problem. Emerging nations with cheaper labour, more disciplined cultures and greater application than our youth, will win the competition for global resources.
Except that is not really how it works. There is a lot of research on social/economic mobility and, for example, the relationship between wages and value added to the economy. Many of them show that we move further and further away from being meritocratic. In some cases systems show signs of being anti-meritocratic where the conman and the charlatan prevails. This is the problem in much that resembles feudalism: elites become passive and parasitical and things eventually stagnate because of that.
I quite agree. That is what I’m suggesting. The new meritocracy will eat itself.
I find it pretty sloppy to refer to degrowth as a “luxury belief.” Or maybe not sloppy, maybe it’s intentionally dismissive. Having done a relatively deep dive into degrowth rationales, I do suspect that the author hasn’t investigated the subject with enough thoroughness or rigour.
This is so common, especially in reactions to heterodox economics. We face radical problems which are the outcomes of long-developing conditions, so it only stands to reason that we ought to encourage radical thinking rather than dismissing it out of hand. Radical, as in from the roots.
So many opinions about causes and proposed solutions are framed in the same old ways, applying the same old assumptions. There’s so little genuine “thinking again,” as Unherd would have it. The “obstacles” the author cites do not fix on core causes, in my view. They may not be trivial, but I don’t think they are essential.
It can be hard to follow Einstein’s advice that “No worthy problem is ever solved in the plane of its original conception.” Entering on this path can trigger discomfort, often intense. Einstein reflected on that in himself, referring to the “effect of fossilization” (letter to Max Born). This kind of sacrifice is necessary, and inevitable; it either happens now, or later when, at some point, it will be too late to solve or even to mitigate the worst outcomes.
Wow, what a lot of words to say nothing, propose nothing, advance no ideas, no workable strategies or solutions. Hot air.
I’m sorry you didn’t like my comment, Deb. I think you’ve misread it, though, because I did propose an idea, a fundamental one. I think it’s key to a workable strategy that before all things we should take care not to dismiss radical ideas as the author did, given the radical nature of the world’s problems.
I advanced the idea that it’s vital to keep open minds and be willing to tolerate discomfort when confronted by challenges to assumptions, especially coming from heterodox economists. Given the state of the world, I foresee this challenge coming up more often, and more intensely. We really need to get a handle on it.
That seems to me a more effective approach than just jumping into the weeds opining about solutions, oblivious or indifferent to our core assumptions, reflexively dismissing radical ideas, as I think the author did. The result will indeed be just hot air — even literally so!
This article gives a great overview of th different strands of the Neo Feudalism debate.
It’s not just Varoufakis and Kroetkin.
https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/neofeudalism-the-end-of-capitalism/
The Big Bang in London in September 1986 and the US equivalent in the 1990s are the two events that, more than any other, underpin the division of the middle class, which is the key point Paul Heron is making. One example of the consequences of that division is the shortage of good teachers. They belong, in income terms, to the declining middle class but the teaching profession belongs in the part of the middle class that is ascending. The powers-that-be will scramble to deal with this conundrum when the shortage of teachers becomes acute.
To me, the term ” middle class” conjours up images of people from Kent and Surrey, who have ” traffic preserves” rather than traffic jams, and call it ” toilet stationary”, but never bog paper, those who send their children to carefully selected minor public schools that they have to live near, yet hate Etonians, Harrovians, Amplefordians and Radleans, who live by ” what the neighbours think” and believe that golf somehow makes them gentlemen: those only one or two generations from working class thenselves, but insufferably snobbish towards working class people, as they sip Earl Grey tea, and schooners of sweet sherry, as they are emerald green with envy at those above. What next? will they call shampoo ” fauxstool”
Middle class is an attitude based on a justified expectation about the future. I accept today the delay of the reward and instead I abstain, study, work, save money rather than spending it, because I expect that tomorrow I will be rewarded and reap the benefits from my choices. This presumes a society which allows for the delays and confirms the belief in the future reward because the reward is actually received. Both very poor and very rich people live by a different set of rules. Neo-feudalism wants to impose these universally for the benefit of a few and to the detriment of many.