How the Rich Live: The New Establishment - Culture, Politics, Education (2000)

• published: 14 Feb 2015
• views: 72

The word bobo, Brooks' most famously coined term, is an abbreviated form of the words bourgeois and bohemian, suggesting a fusion of two distinct social classes (the counter-cultural, hedonistic and artistic bohemian, and the white collar, capitalist bourgeois). The term is used by Brooks to describe the 1990s successors of the yuppies. Often of the corporate upper class, they claim highly tolerant views of others, purchase expensive and exotic items, and believe American society to be meritocratic. Bobos are noted for their aversion to conspicuous consumption while emphasizing the "necessities" of life. Brooks argues that they feel guilty in the way typical of the so-called "greed era" of the 1980s so they prefer to spend extravagantly on kitchens, showers, and other common facilities of everyday life. They "feel" for the labor and working class and often purchase American-made goods rather than less expensive imports. The term "bobo chic" was applied to a style of fashion, similar to "boho chic", that became popular in uptown New York in 2004-5. Bobos often relate to money as a means rather than an end; they do not disdain money but use it to achieve their ends rather than considering wealth as a desirable end in itself. The New York Times, where Mr. Brooks works, has written about the changing tastes of bobos: "Made in the U.S.A." used to be a label flaunted primarily by consumers in the Rust Belt and rural regions. Increasingly, it is a status symbol for cosmopolitan bobos, and it is being exploited by the marketers who cater to them." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobos_in_Paradise Status–income disequilibrium (sometimes abbreviated SID) is a political term frequently used to describe a desirable high status job with (relatively) low income. It is a variation on the sociological term status inconsistency. The phrase was coined by the New York Times columnist David Brooks in his book Bobos in Paradise.[1] He wrote: The sufferers of this malady, have jobs that give them high status but low income. They lunch on an expense account at The Palm, but dine at home on macaroni. All day long the phone-message slips pile up on their desks—calls from famous people seeking favors—but at night they realize the tub needs scrubbing, so it's down on the hands and knees with the Ajax. At work they are aristocrats, Kings of the Meritocracy, schmoozing with Felix Rohatyn. At home they are peasants, wondering if they can really afford to have orange juice every morning.[2] David Brooks characterized the "sufferers" from SID in a long list, which includes TV news producers, museum curators, classical music performers, White House aides, and politicians, among others. Other journalists applied the term to "authors and academics",[3] journalists,[4] writers,[5] "British middle classes",[6] and even to the British MPs.[7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status%E2%80%93income_disequilibrium In political economy, political philosophy, sociology, social sciences, and history, the bourgeoisie (Eng.: /bʊərʒwɑːˈziː/; French pronunciation: ​[buʁʒwazi]) is the wealthy stratum of the middle class that originated during the latter part of the Middle Ages (AD 476–1453).[1][2] The bourgeoisie includes a historical range of socio-economic classes. As such, in the Western world, since the late 18th century, "the bourgeoisie" is a social class "characterized by their ownership of capital, and their related culture"; hence, the personal terms "bourgeois" (masculine) and "bourgeoise" (feminine) culturally identify the man or woman who is a member of the wealthiest social class of a given society, and their materialistic worldview (Weltanschauung). In Marxist philosophy the bourgeoisie is the social class who owns the means of production and whose societal concerns are the value of property and the preservation of capital, in order to ensure the perpetuation of their economic supremacy in society.[3] Joseph Schumpeter instead saw the creation of new bourgeoisie as the driving force behind the capitalist engine, particularly entrepreneurs who took risks in order to bring innovation to industries and the economy through the process of creative destruction. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourgeoisie