I don't know that it's possible to "get" the working class or the poor unless you've been there, any more than it's possible to "get" depression, or racial issues.
I tend to think that there are two sides to this:
While on the one hand it is difficult to "get" certain issues when you're on the outside - there's also certain facets you're not getting while on the inside! In German sociology we call this "dark continents" (which might be a bit of a problematic phrase...), which means that it is not possible to watch one's own back, so to speak. That, while we're inside of the issue, all we can do is watch at the issue from the inside, we lack the perspective from the outside. Ultimately, it would be really helpful if people from the inside and people from the outside worked together to tackle issues, at least on a theoretical basis.
Then, there's empathy, of course. While certain issues might not be our own in a direct way, these issues are of course always our issues at least in an indirect way: Class, Race, Gender are universal issues and that means they are my issues, too! (I mean, without privilege and "white people" there would be no problem in the first place!)
So, of course everybody is influenced and touched by these issues. Insofar, i think everybody (who wants to help) should be welcome to give their input, even if not on the inside.
On Class structure:
To keep it short and simple, i'll go with the "main classes" and "lesser/sub classes" model:
In (industrialized) capitalism, the two main antagonistic classes are those of the capitalists, and the proletariat. The first ones have the capital, while the second one have the labor. Both need each other to produce things (as you need capital and labor to produce) , but the capitalists are the profiteers of this collaboration under capitalist rule.
Then, we have the "ancillary" classes: the "big landowners", "peasants", "agricultural laborers/day laborers" and the "petty bourgeoisie", as well as the the people who fall out of their class and cannot integrate themselves into another one: "lumpenproletariat".
As time goes by and society changes it's methods of production, classes become obsolete or diminished in their importance, eg. the class of "peasants". All of these classes are determined by their participation of the productive sector and their means to earn a living (which side of the surplus value are you on?).
What we see on TV plays mostly within the circles of the "petty bourgeoisie" (often called - inaccurately - "the middle class"): The self employed, the small business owners, servants of the state, artists and artisans, (university students). In short, people who are either not participating in the production of goods (like capitalists and proletariat, or agricultural laborers and big landowners) or are on both sides of the fence (self employment, small business owners).
no subject
I tend to think that there are two sides to this:
While on the one hand it is difficult to "get" certain issues when you're on the outside - there's also certain facets you're not getting while on the inside! In German sociology we call this "dark continents" (which might be a bit of a problematic phrase...), which means that it is not possible to watch one's own back, so to speak. That, while we're inside of the issue, all we can do is watch at the issue from the inside, we lack the perspective from the outside. Ultimately, it would be really helpful if people from the inside and people from the outside worked together to tackle issues, at least on a theoretical basis.
Then, there's empathy, of course. While certain issues might not be our own in a direct way, these issues are of course always our issues at least in an indirect way: Class, Race, Gender are universal issues and that means they are my issues, too! (I mean, without privilege and "white people" there would be no problem in the first place!)
So, of course everybody is influenced and touched by these issues. Insofar, i think everybody (who wants to help) should be welcome to give their input, even if not on the inside.
On Class structure:
To keep it short and simple, i'll go with the "main classes" and "lesser/sub classes" model:
In (industrialized) capitalism, the two main antagonistic classes are those of the capitalists, and the proletariat. The first ones have the capital, while the second one have the labor. Both need each other to produce things (as you need capital and labor to produce) , but the capitalists are the profiteers of this collaboration under capitalist rule.
Then, we have the "ancillary" classes: the "big landowners", "peasants", "agricultural laborers/day laborers" and the "petty bourgeoisie", as well as the the people who fall out of their class and cannot integrate themselves into another one: "lumpenproletariat".
As time goes by and society changes it's methods of production, classes become obsolete or diminished in their importance, eg. the class of "peasants". All of these classes are determined by their participation of the productive sector and their means to earn a living (which side of the surplus value are you on?).
What we see on TV plays mostly within the circles of the "petty bourgeoisie" (often called - inaccurately - "the middle class"): The self employed, the small business owners, servants of the state, artists and artisans, (university students). In short, people who are either not participating in the production of goods (like capitalists and proletariat, or agricultural laborers and big landowners) or are on both sides of the fence (self employment, small business owners).