西媒导读 第 27 期 – 西方社会阶层的分化 Accelerating Openness

Edited by Adrian Chen Apr.4, 2015

The Mentality Carrier

西媒导读 —— 致力于提供前沿、通用而有深度的信息服务

西媒导读 第 27 期 西方社会阶层的分化

MC NO.27 The 3 - Ladder System of Social Class in the U.S.

。

University of Tasmania, Australia

April 4th, 2015

西媒导读 第 27 期 – 西方社会阶层的分化 Edited by Adrian Chen

1 | P a g e

导读：当下的我们每一个人，都身处于不同的成长发展阶段——由于身份和工

作岗位的差异，每个人都站在不同的观测点端详这个世界。所谓社会阶层，便

是学者在分析社会结构时所进行的一种主观想象。不同社会阶层的人们生活在

不同的语境基础之上，思维方式、行为方式和评判标准，均存在着显著差别；

中国与西方国家的差异，除了体现在文化习俗上之外，很大程度体现在阶层上。

本文作者根据自身的经验和体会，对社会阶层的特点和阶层之间的矛盾进行了

系统而详尽的阐述，为我们理解社会阶层的分化提供了一种独特视角。

The 3-Ladder System of Social Class in the U.S.

Michael Ochurch, Sep. 9, 2012

Illustration from a 1916 advertisement for a vocational school in a US magazine

Typical depictions of social class in the United States posit [1] a linear,

ordered hierarchy. I’ve actually come to the conclusion that there are 3

distinct ladders, with approximately four social classes on each. Additionally,

there is an underclass of people not connected to any of the ladders. I’ll

attempt to explain how this three-ladder system works, what it means, and

also why it is a source of conflict. The ladders I will assign the names Labour,

Gentry, and Elite. My specific percentage estimates of each category are not

derived from anything other than estimation based on what I’ve seen, and my

limited understanding of the macroeconomics of income in the United States,

so don’t take them for more than an approximation. I’ll assess the social role

of each of these classes in order, from bottom to top.

This is, one should note, an exposition [2] of social class rather than income.

Therefore, in many cases, precise income criteria cannot be defined, because

there’s so much more involved. Class is more sociological in nature than

wealth or income, and much harder to change. People can improve their

incomes dramatically, but it’s rare for a person to move more than one or two

rungs in a lifetime. Social class determines how a person is perceived, that

person’s access to information, and what opportunities will be available to a

person.

对于美国社会而言，人们通常假想存在一个有次序的分层。其中，有三个层级

存在显著的差别，在这里我把它们称为劳动阶层、绅士阶层和统治阶层；另外

还有一个阶层与这三个阶层几乎毫无关联，这就是社会底层。我对这三个阶层

人口比例所做的估测，可以说是完全依据我的经验，而并不是权威的数据；不

过，我相信有数据作为参照将会助于读者理解这篇文章。需要指明的一点是，

收入的多少并不能完全决定人所在社会阶层的高低——一个人在短期内可能会

大幅提升自己的收入，而在一代人的时间内往往很难跨越一到两个阶层。不同

阶层的差异主要体现在人的成长环境、获取信息的方式和拥有机会的数量的不

同。在接下来的篇幅里，我将试图解释每一层级的特点、该系统的运转机制，

以及层级之间的矛盾。

Underclass 社会底层 (10%)

The underclass are not just poor, because there are poor people on the Labour

ladder and a few (usually transiently or voluntarily) on the Gentry ladder who

are poor. In fact, most poor Americans are not members of the Underclass.

People in the Underclass are generationally poor. Some have never held jobs.

Some are third-generation jobless, even. Each of these ladders (Labour,

Gentry, Elite) can be seen as an infrastructure based, in part, on social

connections. However, there are some people who are not connected to any

of these infrastructures, and they are the underclass.

社会底层的显著特点体现在每一代轮回性的贫穷。他们在社会上尚未建立起人

际交往圈，他们和其他阶层也几乎毫无关联。

西媒导读 第 27 期 – 西方社会阶层的分化 Edited by Adrian Chen

2 | P a g e

The Labour Ladder 劳动阶层 (65%)

The labour ladder represents “blue-collar” work and is often associated with

“working class”, but some people in this distinction earn solidly “middle-

class” incomes over $100,000 per year. What defines the Labour ladder is

that the work is seen as a commodity, and that there’s rarely a focus on long-

term career management. People are assessed based on how hard they work

because, in this world, the way to become richer is to work more (not

necessarily more efficiently or “smarter”). The Labour ladder is organized

almost completely based on income; the more you make (age-adjusted) the

higher your position is, and the more likely it is that your work is respected.

综述：对于劳动阶层而言，他们当中有工薪族（出租自己的劳动力，被别人雇

佣来换取生活费用的人群），也的有人收入能够达到中产水平。不过，对于他

们来说，工作主要是为了满足日常生活所需。在这一阶层里，他们当中大部分

人的工作重复而单调——提高收入主要靠“多花时间多卖力”，效率提高或方法

改进的空间已近乎饱和——也正因如此，他们职业生涯的发展极为有限。

Secondary Labour 二级劳动者 (L4, 30%) is what we call the “working poor”.

These are people who earn 1 to 3 times the minimum wage and often have no

health benefits. Many work two “part time” jobs at 35 hours per week (so

their firms don’t have to provide benefits) with irregular hours. They have

few skills and no leverage [3], so they tend to end up in the worst jobs, and

those jobs enervate [4] them so much that it becomes impossible for them to

get the skills that would help them advance. The reason for the name

Secondary in this class is that they are trapped in the “secondary” labour

market: jobs originally intended for teenagers and well-off retirees that were

never intended to pay a living wage. Wages for this category are usually

quoted hourly and between $5 and $15 per hour.

对于 L4 群体的劳动者来说，他们缺乏专业技能，薪水刚刚能够达到最低标准

线，而且很多人所从事的工作对健康有一定影响。每日的繁重工作会消耗他们

绝大部分的体力，这也使得他们很难有时间和精力学习新的知识技能。不过，

高中生和大学生在做兼职、假期打工时，常常做这一类的工作。

Primary Labour 初级劳动者 (L3, 20%) is what we tend to associate with

“blue-collar” America. If by “average” we mean median, this is the average

social class of Americans, although most people would call it working class,

not middle. It usually means having enough money to afford an occasional

vacation and a couple restaurant meals per month. People in the L3 class

aren’t worried about having food to eat, but they aren’t very comfortable

either, and an ill-timed layoff can be catastrophic. If the market for their skills

collapses, they can end up falling down a rung into L4. When you’re in the

Labour category, market forces can propel you up or down, and the market

value of “commodity” labour has been going down for a long time. Typical

L3 compensation is $20,000 to $60,000 per year.

每当提到 L3 群体的劳动者，我们常把他们和美国的“蓝领”联系起来。虽然他

们的年薪已经达到了中位数水平，但他们更多地被称为“工薪族”。他们的收入

还算稳定，却依然会受到市场波动的影响。

*Data based on author's estimation

High-skill Labour 高级技术劳动者 (L2, 14%) entails having enough income

and job security to be legitimately “middle class”. People in this range can

attend college courses, travel internationally (but not very often) and send

their children to good schools. Plumbers, airline pilots, and electricians are in

this category, and some of these people make over $100,000 per year. For

them, there must be some barrier to entry into their line of work, or some

force keeping pay high (such as unionization). Within the culture of the

Labour ladder, these people are regarded highly.

10.0%

65.0%

23.5%

1.5%

Percentage of Population Sorted by Social Class in the United States*

Underclass

Labour

Gentry

Elite

西媒导读 第 27 期 – 西方社会阶层的分化 Edited by Adrian Chen

3 | P a g e

对于高级技术劳动者来说，他们可以被名正言顺地称为“中产阶级”——飞行

员、电工以及管道工人都可以划入这一群体。进入这类行业需要一定门槛，通

常需要几年的专业资格培训；另外，该群体受到工会的保护——这使得他们的

收入能够居高不下。

Labour Leadership 劳动阶层领头人 (L1, 1%) is the top of the Labour ladder,

and it’s what blue-collar America tends to associate with success. These are

people who, often through years of very hard work and by displaying

leadership capability, have ascended [5] to an upper-middle-class income.

They aren’t usually “managers” (store managers are L2) but small business

owners and landlords, while they’re often seen doing the grunt work [6] of

their businesses (such as by running the register when all the cashiers call in

sick). They can generate passive income from endeavours like restaurant

franchises and earn a solidly upper-middle income standing, but culturally

they are still part of Labour. This suits them well, because where they excel is

at leading people who are in the Labour category.

L1 这一群体可以说是劳动阶层领头人，但他们通常不是高级管理人员。他们

当中一部分人通过长年的工作经验积累，成为生产一线的领导者；还有一部分

人成为小生意的主人、店主或是农场主。不过，他们所做的事情依然缺乏技术

含量，保持着较为传统的经营方式——所以从科技和人文影响力的层面来讲，

他们依然属于劳动阶层。

The Gentry Ladder 绅士阶层 (23.5%)

England had a landed (拥有地产的) gentry for a while. We have an educated

one. Labour defines status based on the market value of one’s commodity

work. The Gentry rebels against commoditization with a focus on qualities

that might be, from an extensional perspective, irrelevant. They dislike

conflict diamonds, like fair-trade coffee, and drive cultural trends. They value

themselves not based on their incomes but, much more so, on access to

respected institutions: elite universities, leading technology companies and

artistic endeavours [7]. Labour aspires to occupational success and

organizational leadership, while the Gentry aspires to education and cultural

leadership.

综述：对于绅士阶层而言，他们所看重的价值不仅仅在收入水平上，更重要的

是能够有资格出入高端学术机构或商业机构——比如一流高等学府、高新产业

公司，以及艺术区——他们追求在科技和人文领域上取得更高的成就。从绅士

阶层人与人之间的交往方式来看，他们对国界和文化差异的概念相对更加淡

薄，而更专注于其专业领域的探究与交流。与劳动阶层相比，绅士阶层对世界

有着更为国际化的认识，共享着类似的做事方式——即使他们之前未曾谋面，

高水准的教育和丰富的专业经历足以使得他们有较多共同语言。

Before going further, it’s worth noting that the typical socioeconomic

ordering would have each Gentry level two levels above the corresponding

Labour level in social standing. Thus, G1 > G2 > (G3 ~= L1) > (G4 ~= L2) >

L3 > L4.

Transitional Gentry 过渡绅士阶层 (G4, 5%) is the lowest rung of the Gentry

ladder. It’s the class of people who are coming into the Gentry, usually from

L2, and most people in it are looking to attain G3 (and many do). Since the

Gentry is defined by education, culture, and cultural influence, earning a

four-year degree (which about 20% of American adults have) will usually put

a person solidly into G3.

每个阶层并不是孤立的，阶层之间也有相互穿插、渗透的关系——比如 G4 过

渡群体，他们往往从 L2 群体中转移过来。

Primary Gentry 初级绅士阶层 (G3, 16%) is what Americans think of as the

cultural “upper-middle class”. They have four-year college degrees and

typically have professional jobs of middling autonomy and above-average

income, but usually not leadership positions. Incomes in this class vary

widely (in part, because the Gentry is not defined by income) but generally

fall between $30,000 and $200,000 per year. However, they are often viewed

as gauche (不善交际的) by the higher-ranking G1 and G2 classes.

G3 这一群体的人们受过良好的大学教育，有着专业性强的工作以及中产以上

的收入——这使得他们在经济上能够维持很高的独立自主性。不过，在 G1 和

G2 群体看来，他们能够在其岗位上踏实做事，但还不善于拓展人脉。

High Gentry 高级绅士阶层 (G2, 2.45%) tend to come from elite colleges and

traditionally gravitated toward “junior executive” roles in medium-sized

companies, innovative start-ups, management consultancies, and possibly

investment banking (which facilitates the G2-E4 transition). Having

interesting, respected work is important to G2’s. To a G2, being a college

professor, scientist, entrepreneur, or writer are desirable jobs. Creative control

of work is important to G2’s, although not all are able to get it (as creative

西媒导读 第 27 期 – 西方社会阶层的分化 Edited by Adrian Chen

4 | P a g e

jobs are so rare). Members of this social class aggressively manage their

careers to get the most out (in terms of intellectual and financial reward) of

their careers, but what they really want is enough success and money to do

what they really value, which is to influence culture.

G2 群体的人们通常从顶尖高等学府毕业，并在职场生涯中渐渐发展为普通公

司或大学的领导者。大学教授、科学家、企业家，或是作家，一般都属于这一

阶层，可以说是引领社会发展的中坚力量。他们所从事的行业需要不断注入创

意和革新，所以其收入的绝大部分依靠脑力劳动（如发表学术论文、科研、管

理以及投资）。他们在名望和金钱上获得成功以后，使得他们能够推行其价值

观和做事方式，进而影响一大批年轻人或大众文化。

Here I would say that G2 is my native social class, and probably that of most

of my readers.

Cultural Influencers 对社会文化具有影响力的阶层 (G1, 0.05%) are the

pinnacle (尖顶) of the Gentry. For G1, I’m not talking about “celebrities” -

celebrities are a bizarre and tiny category that mixes all three ladders (I’d

argue that they’re the upper tier of L1; most lack the power of Elites and the

refinement of the Gentry). Rather, I’m talking about people who are widely

recognized as smart, knowledgeable, creative, and above all, interesting. G1’s

are not “famous” in the celebrity sense, and most of them aren’t that rich. I’d

guess that their incomes vary mostly from $100,000 to $1 million per year,

which is low for a social class that is so difficult to enter.

It’s quite likely that G1 is expanding, and it was probably much smaller in the

past. The internet is allowing more people to become well-known and have

some degree of cultural influence. Many bloggers have entered G1 without

relying on established institutions such as publishers or universities (which

used to be the only way). That said, G1 requires reliability in attention;

people having their 15 minutes don’t count.

G1 群体是绅士阶层的最高级别——他们未必是社会上的名人，却具有极高的

聪明才智，精通其专业领域并把握其最新发展动向，为社会提供前沿而有深度

的信息服务，在其行业有着很强的影响力。这些人可以说是孜孜以求的探路者

——随着信息技术的发展，他们所产生的影响力会日益显露出来——预计在不

久的将来，更多的人会跨入 G1 这一群体。

The Elite Ladder 统治阶层 (1.5%)

This is an infrastructure “at the top of society”, but many of the people it

includes are in many ways nowhere near the top. People complain about “the

1%”, but the reality is that most of that top 1.0% are nowhere near controlling

positions within society.

Not all of the Elite are in the top 1% for income, but most will have the

opportunity to be. The Elite includes everyone from billionaires to out-of-

college investment banking analysts (who earn a middle-class income in one

of the most expensive cities on the planet). What they have in common is that

they are exerting themselves toward ownership. Labour provides the work

and values effort and loyalty. The Gentry provides culture and values

education and creativity. The Elite owns things and values control and

establishment.

综述：对于统治阶层来说，他们通常并不在具体职位上掌权，更大程度上是幕

后的决策者和操纵者——他们拥有并努力维系社会上大部分的资产。劳动阶层

珍视工作上的努力与对岗位的热爱，为社会提供劳动增值；绅士阶层重视教育

与创新，为社会提供科技与人文方面的信息服务；而统治阶层是大型资产的所

有者，掌控和建立庞大的帝国。

As with the Gentry and Labour, when comparing these ladders, one should

consider an Elite rung to be two levels above the corresponding Gentry rung,

so in terms of social standing, E1 > E2 > (E3 ~= G1) > (E4 ~= G2) > G3 >

G4.

The Strivers 打拼者 (E4, 0.5%) are another transitional class that is generally

for young people only. They aren’t actually Elite, but they might, if lucky,

move into E3. Junior investment bankers, law firm associates, and young

start-up entrepreneurs are in this category. They’re trying to “break in” to

something rich and successful. If they get in, they’ll become solid E3. If they

fail in doing so, they usually return to G2: upper-middle-class professionals

not strongly bound to the Elite infrastructure. G2 is usually a happier place

than E4, but E3’s and E4’s tend to deride (嘲笑) this transition.

E4 这一群体主要是年轻人——金融、法律界的专业人士以及创业公司领头人

都在这一行列——他们在进行不断的尝试并试图打入统治阶层。一旦打入，他

们很有可能会坐稳 E3 平台；退而求其次的话，他们也会返回到 G2 平台。

西媒导读 第 27 期 – 西方社会阶层的分化 Edited by Adrian Chen

5 | P a g e

Elite Servants 统治者仆人 (E3, 0.8%) are the law-firm partners and senior

investment bankers and corporate executives that might be called the

“working rich” and they comprise what was once called the “white-shoe [8]”

culture. They’re quite well-off, as far as servants go, often earning incomes

from $200,000 to $5 million per year, but their social standing is conditional.

They serve the rich, and the rich have to keep finding them useful for them to

maintain their place. It’s not an enviable place to be, because the social

expectations associated with maintaining E3 status require high spending, and

even the extremely well-compensated ($1 million per year and up) E3’s

rarely have the savings to survive more than a year or two without a job,

because of the need to maintain connections. E3’s tend to have as many

money problems as people in the lower social classes. E3’s also suffer

because they live in a “small world” society driven by reputation, long-

standing grudges and often petty contempt. E3’s still get fired – a lot,

because the pretence that justifies E3-level status (of a large-company

“executive”) requires leadership and many don’t have it – and when it

happens to them, they can face years during which they can’t find appropriate

employment.

E3 群体主要是金融、法律界的资深业内人士以及大型跨国公司总裁。他们虽

然有着极高的薪酬，但依然扮演幕后商业大亨的随从角色，妥协于巨头公司文

化。这一群体在表面上十分风光，但可能并不能够令所有人羡慕——为了保持

这一地位，他们需要持续不断地维系人脉并付出很高的时间与代价；同时他们

也需要应对层出不穷的资金支出矛盾。另外，“统治者仆人”同样会面临被解雇

的风险——因为并不是每个人都有卓越的领导才能的——一旦问题出现使得他

们从大型公司总裁的位置上退下来，这可能会使得他们在几年之内都难以接手

新的工作。

People tend to think of face leaders (politicians and CEOs) as belonging to a

higher social class, but most are E3. If they were higher, they wouldn’t have

to work so hard to be rich. Examining our most recent presidents, Barack

Obama is G1, the George Bushes were E2, Bill Clinton was E3, and Reagan

was in the celebrity category that is a hybrid of E3 and L1. John Kennedy

was E2, while Lyndon Johnson was L1. Most CEOs, however, are strictly E3,

because CEOs are “rubber gloves” that are used for dirty work and thrown

aside if they get too filthy. There’s too much reputation risk involved in

being a corporate CEO for an E2 to want the job under most circumstances.

人们往往觉得台面上的领导者（比如政治家和跨国公司总裁）的社会地位会属

于更高的级别，然而他们当中的大部分处于 E3 平台。这些 CEO 或政客在任职

期间一旦出现闪失和差错，他们便立马自动成为“挡箭牌”。

National Elite 国家级统治者 (E2, 0.19%) are what most Americans think of

as “upper class” or “old money”. They have Roman Numerals in their names

and their families have attended Ivy League (常春藤盟校) colleges for

generations. They’re socially very well connected and have the choice not to

work, or the choice to work in a wide array of well-compensated and highly-

regarded jobs. Rarely do they work full time under traditional employment

terms – never as subordinates, sometimes as executives in an apprentice role,

often in board positions or “advisory” roles. It’s uncommon that an E2 will

put a full-time effort into anything, because their objective with work is to

associate their names with successful institutions, but not to get too involved.

To maintain E2 status, being wealthy is required. It takes about $500,000 per

year, after tax, in income at a minimum. However, it’s not hard for a person

with E2 status and connections to acquire this, even if the family money is

lost. The jobs that E3’s regard as the pinnacle of professional achievement

(the idea that such a notion as “professional achievement” exists is laughable

to them; paid full-time work is dishonourable from an E2 perspective) are

their safety careers.

对于 E2 群体，维系这一阶层地位需要亿万资产——他们当中有欧洲国家的皇

室，也有世代从常春藤盟校毕业的家族。“统治者仆人”所追求的职业生涯巅

峰，对于他们来说是稀松平常的。他们常常参与高级别的仪式和社会活动——

仿佛他们的到访会使得周围蓬荜生辉。

Global Elite 世界级统治者 (E1, up to 60,000 people worldwide, about 30% of

those in the U.S.) are a global social class, and extremely powerful in a trans-

national way. These are the very rich, powerful, and deeply uncultured

barbarians from all over the world who start wars in the Middle East for

sport, make asses of themselves in American casinos, rape ski bunnies at

Davos, and run the world. Like the Persian army in 300, they come from all

over the place; they’re the ugliest and most broken of each nation. They’re

the corporate billionaires and drug kingpins and third-world despots (专制君

主) and real estate magnates. They’re not into the genteel, reserved “WASP

culture” of E2’s, the corporate earnestness and “white shoe” professionalism

西媒导读 第 27 期 – 西方社会阶层的分化 Edited by Adrian Chen

6 | P a g e

of E3’s, or the intellectualism and creativity of G1’s and G2’s. They are all

about control, and on a global scale. They aren’t mere management or even

“executives”. They’re owners. They don’t care what they own, or what

direction the world takes, as long as they’re on top. They almost never take

official executive positions within large companies, but they make a lot of the

decisions behind the scenes.

Unlike the National Elite, who tend toward a cultural conservatism and a

desire to preserve certain traits that they consider necessary to national

integrity, the Global Elite doesn’t give a shit about any particular country.

They’re fully multinational and view all the world’s political nations as

entities to be exploited (like everything else). They foster corruption and

crime if it serves their interests, and those interests are often ugly. Like Kefka

from Final Fantasy VI, their reason for living is to create monuments to

nonexistence.

国家级统治者能够为本国国民利益着想，而对于世界级统治者来说，他们根本

不在乎是哪一个国家，他们早已把世界看作一个整体，不断地进行野蛮式的搜

刮掠夺。他们不是高级管理者，也不是总裁，而是巨型公司和商业帝国的所有

者。他们并不关心做什么领域、什么方向，只要能够在世界范围内搜刮资源、

财产和盈利，并巩固其至高无上的权力，任何事情都是可以去做的。顶级的商

业大亨、房地产巨头，以及第三世界的专制君主，都可以划入这一群体。

E1 is pretty much objectively evil, without exceptions. There are decent

people who are billionaires, so there’s no income or wealth level at which

100% objective evil becomes the norm. But if you climb the social ladder,

you get to a level at which it’s all cancer, all the way up. That’s E1. Why is it

this way? Because the top end of the world’s elite is a social elite, not an

economic one, and you don’t get deep into an elevated social elite unless you

are very similar to the centre of that cluster, and for the past 10,000 years the

centre of humanity’s top-of-the-top cluster has always been deep, featureless

evil: people who burn peasants’ faces off because it amuses them. Whether

you’re talking about a real person like Hitler, Stalin, Erik Prince, Osama bin

Laden, or Kissinger, or a fictional example like The Joker, Kefka, Walter

White, or Randall Flagg; when you get to the top of society, it’s always the

same guy. Call it The Devil, but what’s scary is that it needs (and has) no

supernatural powers; it’s human, and while one its representatives might get

knocked off, another one will step up.

Ladder Conflict 阶层之间的矛盾概况

What does all this mean? How do these ladders interrelate? Do these three

separate social class structures often find themselves at odds (in

disagreement) and fight? Can people be part of more than one?

What I’ve called the Labour, Gentry, and Elite “ladders” can more easily be

described as “infrastructures”. For Labour, this infrastructure is largely

physical and the relevant connection is knowing how to use that physical

device or space, and getting people to trust a person to competently use

(without owning, because that’s out of the question for most) these resources.

For the Gentry, it’s an “invisible graph” of knowledge and education

comprised largely of ideas. For the Elite, it’s a tight, exclusive network

centred on social connections, power, and dominance. People can be

connected to more than one of these infrastructures, but people usually bind

more tightly to the one of higher status, except when at the transitional ranks

(G4 and E4) which tend to punt people who don’t ascend after some time.

The overwhelmingly high likelihood is that a person is aligned most strongly

to one and only one of these structures. The values are too conflicting for a

person not to pick one horse or the other.

我们首先对每个阶层的特点进行小结：劳动阶层主要从事具体而实际的工作；

绅士阶层崇尚知识、教育和新的思想；统治阶层建立起一个排外的小圈子，看

重人脉、权力和主导地位。

I’ve argued that the ladders connect at a two-rung difference, with L2 ~ G4,

L1 ~ G3, G2 ~ E4, and G1 ~ E3. These are “social equivalencies” that don’t

involve a change in social status, so they’re the easiest to transitions to make

(in both directions). They represent a transfer from one form of capital to

another. A skilled labourer (L2) who begins taking night courses (G4) is

using time to get an education rather than more money. Likewise, one who

moves from the high gentry (G2) to a 90-hour-per-week job in private wealth

management (E4) is applying her refined intellectual skills and knowledge to

serving the rich, in the hope of making the connections to become one of

them.

That said, these ladders often come into conflict. The most relevant one to

most of my readers will be the conflict between the Gentry and the Elite. The

Gentry tends to be left-libertarian and values creativity, individual autonomy,

西媒导读 第 27 期 – 西方社会阶层的分化 Edited by Adrian Chen

7 | P a g e

and free expression. The Elite tends toward centre-right authoritarianism and

corporate conformity, and it views creativity as dangerous (except when

applied to hiding financial risks or justifying illegal wars). The Gentry

believes that it is the deserving elite and the face of the future, and that it can

use culture to engineer a future in which its values are elite; while the upper

tier of the Elite finds the Gentry pretentious [9] and subversive [10]. The

relationship between the Gentry and Elite is incredibly contentious [11]. It’s

a cosmic, ubiquitous war between the past and the future.

说到阶层之间的矛盾，最为明显、激烈的斗争发生在绅士阶层和统治阶层之

间。绅士阶层往往代表左翼，崇尚公平、创意、个人独立发展以及自由言论。

然而统治阶层更倾向于代表权力独裁和大公司保守主义，常常把新想法视为可

疑而危险的事物。

绅士阶层认为他们面向未来、孜孜以求，相信在未来他们能够成为新的掌权阶

层；而当今的统治阶层一方面认为绅士阶层有些自命不凡，另一方面绅士阶层

对他们也极具颠覆性。绅士阶层与统治阶层的激烈斗争无处不在，在过去未曾

停息过，在将来也不会止息。

Between the Gentry and Labour, there is an attitude of distrust. The Elite has

been running a divide-and-conquer strategy between these two categories for

decades. This works because the Elite understands (and can ape) the culture

of the Gentry, but has something in common with Labour that sets the

categories apart from the Gentry: a conception of work as a theatre for

masculine dominance. This is something that the Elite and Labour both

believe in – the visceral strength and importance of the alpha-male in high-

stakes gambling settings such as most modern work – but that the Gentry

would rather deny. Gender is a major part of the Elite’s strategy in turning

Labour against the Gentry: make the Gentry look effeminate. That’s why

“feminist” is practically a racial slur, despite the world desperately needing

attention to women’s political equality, health and well-being.

统治阶层所采取的一种策略是，挑拨离间劳动阶层和绅士阶层，激化之间的矛

盾，从而顺势掌控这两个阶层。

The relationship between the Gentry and Elite is one of open rivalry, and that

between the Gentry and Labour is one of distrust. What about Labour and the

Elite? That one is not symmetric the Elite exploit and despise Labour as a

class of useful people. How does Labour see the Elite? They don’t. The Elite

has managed to convince Labour that the Gentry (who are open about their

cultural elitism, while the Elite hides its social and economic elitism) is the

actual “liberal elite” responsible for Labour’s misery over the past 30 years.

In effect, the Elite has constructed an “infinity pool” where the Elite appears

to be a hyper-successful extension of Labour, lumping these two disparate

ladders into an “us” and placing the Gentry and Underclass into “them”.

那么，统治阶层与劳动阶层的关系是如何的呢？对于统治阶层来说，他们看不

起劳动阶层，只是在单方面利用其劳动力；而对于劳动阶层来说，他们看不清

统治阶层的真实面貌。一方面，统治阶层隐藏其领导权，尽力把绅士阶层推到

劳动阶层的前面，把劳动阶层出现的问题包袱丢给绅士阶层去承担。另一方

面，统治阶层努力讨好劳动阶层，让他们以为劳动阶层之上即是统治阶层，给

他们造成“空中泳池”的幻象，所以劳动阶层往往看不到他们和统治阶层之间存

在的巨大间隔。

Analysis of Current Conflict 现阶段矛盾分析

Despite its upper ranks being filled by people who are effectively thugs (不法

之徒), the Elite isn’t entirely evil. By population, most of them are merely E3

and E4 stewards with minimal decision-making power, and a lot of those

come from (and return to) the Gentry and maintain those values. On the other

hand, Elite values tend to be undesirable, because at that structure’s pinnacle

are the E1 crime bosses. There are good people within the Elite, even though

the Elite itself is not good.

For virtue, the Gentry does better. I don’t want to fall into the American

fallacy of conflating (混淆) “middle class” with virtue, and there are some

awful and good people in all social classes, but I think that the Gentry is a

more inclusive and reflective elite – one of ideas and values, not based on

exclusivity.

One Gentry stronghold for a long time has been high technology, a

meritocracy (知识界精华) where skill, know-how, and drive enabled a person

to rise to technical leadership of increasing scope and eventually business

leadership and entrepreneurship. This created the engineering culture of

Hewlett-Packard and the “Don’t Be Evil” mantra of Google. This is Gentry

culture asserting itself. Be ethical, seek positive-sum outcomes, and win by

being great rather than by harming, robbing, or intimidating others. It’s not

how business is practiced in most of the world – zero-sum thuggery is a lot

西媒导读 第 27 期 – 西方社会阶层的分化 Edited by Adrian Chen

8 | P a g e

more common – but it’s how great businesses are made. This weird world in

which self-made success was regarded higher than entrenchment, symbolized

in Silicon Valley, enabled people from the Gentry to become very rich and

Gentry ideas to establish lasting success in business.

从道德层面上来讲，绅士阶层的所作所为相对更好一些。绅士阶层包容性强，

善于反省，也易接受新事物，致力于创造真正的价值，而不是倚靠排外而维系

利益。虽然当前统治阶层传承和拥有大部分资产，但绅士阶层掌握着大量专业

信息——这使得他们在信息时代具有很强的竞争力，统治阶层的实力被不断削

弱。比如，绅士阶层的一个明显优势是长期掌握前沿的核心技术，其中一部分

人成为科技界的领军团体——这使得他们企业家式的领导能力茁壮成长。绅士

阶层在过去几年间在科技领域所创造的奇迹，也正是他们当代的价值宣言。

本文原载于：https://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2012/09/09/the-3-ladder-

system-of-social-class-in-the-u-s/ [1] posit (verb):Put forward as fact or as a basis for argument 设想，假定

[2] exposition (noun): A comprehensive description and explanation of an

idea or theory 阐述；博览会

[3] leverage (verb): The power to influence a person or situation 杠杆作用；

影响力

[4] enervate Make (someone) feel drained of energy or vitality 使失去活力；

使衰弱

[5] ascend (verb): Go up or climb 攀登

[6] grunt work: work that is repetitious, often physically exhausting, and

boring 枯燥而乏味的工作

[7] An artistic endeavour revolves around the emotions, creativity and

individualism. Typically they involve the humanities and the arts, be it

literature, music, painting, interior design, etc. The emotional element is

always latently or potentially or overtly present in that you feel emotions and

intuitions when creating the art. Art is highly individualistic so that whatever

one experience, someone else could not totally replicate. Individual creativity

is celebrated. For science, however, objectivity, standard repeatable

experiments, logic and rational observation prevail. Emotions are kept to a

minimum because they could skew our objective, unbiased, quantitative

(versus artistic which is qualitative) inferences, or reasoning with facts and

information. Math is the language of science, whereas regular literary

language and other subjective mediums (air for music) and materials (clay for

pottery, canvas for painting) preside over artistic endeavours. Precise

empirical data, procedures and observations are important in science so that if

you make a discovery, other scientific researchers can replicate and thus

verify your results.

[8] White shoe firm is a phrase used to describe leading professional

services firms in the United States, particularly firms that have been in

existence for more than a century and represent Fortune 500 companies. It

typically—but not always—refers to banking, accounting, law, and

management consulting firms, especially those based in New York and

Boston.

[9] pretentious (adj): Attempting to impress by affecting greater importance

or merit than is actually possessed 狂妄的，自命不凡的

[10] subversive (adj): Seeking or intended to subvert an established system

or institution 颠覆性的，破坏性的

[11] contentious (adj): Causing or likely to cause an argument; controversial

引起争论的

推荐栏目：https://www.boundless.com/

Cloud Powered Education

Boundless improves education for millions of students and educators through

educational resources powered by cloud technology. With content created by

a community of educators, who work side-by-side with subject-matter

experts, Boundless provides ready-to-use online content, study materials, and

assessment items to make teaching more efficient and learning more

effective.

The Mentality Carrier 2015 | Tasmania | Australia

Email: mentality.carrier@qq.com

Official Page: http://issuu.com/mentality.carrier