Class Analysis and COIN

[Ken White]

Rightly or wrongly, and in no particular order, those three aid in class assortment to one degree or another in all societies. I realize you referred to wealth and your reference is correct but wealth also can be a determinant in some societies.

Avoid purely western thought in your effort; for example, it is often said that in the west, persons amass wealth so that they may influence power; elsewhere in the world men seek power so that they may amass wealth.

Skin color is not purely racial difference, it applies as well, perhaps more pointedly from your analytical standpoint, to stratification within groups.

Education is a determinant throughout the world -- and, in different parts of the world, the type of education can make a significant difference. Stratification on educational lines is more severe in the west than elsewhere.

[Ron Humphrey]

How do you work in the "artificial" classes created in each and every society through Fame, fortune, skill, fortitude, strength.

Actors/Actresses
Athletes
Artisans
etc

Each with their own select set of problems derived from the greater focus placed on them then the average citizen

And or the influences they have on a given populace for various reasons

[AmericanPride]

Ron,

Good question. I think those classes are roughly comparable to the court jester's of the feudal age, though today they are certainly more wealthy and more famous. In this sense, I think what is important is that those classes are dependent on the patronage of the elite and wealthy business/political leaders. Therefore to some degree the entertainer classes project the four masks.

To clarify, unlike Marx where he claims that one class dominants society and that all major features of that society reflects the interests of the single dominant class, I think there are a large variety of classes, some strong and some weak. Depending on the size of the society in question, and the relationship of those classes with one another, there can be a number of dominant classes, either competing or cooperating with one another. Here I would differentiate (though I did not do so in my original argument) between classes and factions, whereas the first represents an objective, permanent and materialist categorization reflecting the position of the classes in relationship to the society's hub of power (which I would further argue is always economic), the latter represents a subjective, temporary, and abstract categorization evolving as the classes compete, cooperate, divide or unite.

[AmericanPride]

Ken,

Thanks for your comments. I would argue that education is a reflection of a class's status rather than a determinant because it reflects that class' access to knowledge, which itself is a commodity. What I think is interesting to note is that a significant number of insurgencies and revolutions are led by a vanguard of professionally educated cadre who were at some point alienated from the system's (local/national/international) distribution of power. IMO, this reveals that access to knowledge is an indicator of a class' status but not necessarily its position, and sometimes that access has unintended consequences.

As for skin color, I would include that in a broad definition of 'race' (where I would also include ethnicity, tribal identity, and other such relationships).

You make a good point on wealth and that is something I will integrate into my analysis.

[Ken White]

Re: Education, we can disagree on that. I think you'll find the in many nations it is difficult to pin down the role education plays. Take the US as an example, consider hiring practices and ponder Richard Florida's thesis just as two quick examples. You may or may not know a family where a son was expected to go to college and do great things and elected not to go. Is he still a member of his parent's 'class' -- I suggest most may be, some will be -- and some will not be. For that matter, look at the Army...

As for skin color, I would include that in a broad definition of 'race' (where I would also include ethnicity, tribal identity, and other such relationships).

You could but you'll also find that skin color within races, ethnicity, tribes and even families can make a significant difference in the class to which a person might aspire, might reach and/ or from which one might be excluded. Thus my comment was worded as it was: "Skin color is not purely racial difference, it applies as well, perhaps more pointedly from your analytical standpoint, to stratification within groups."(emphasis added / kw) That applies to an extent in this country but that issue is quite significant in some others. Check out Brazil -- or Panama.

[wm]

Good question. I think those classes are roughly comparable to the court jester's of the feudal age, though today they are certainly more wealthy and more famous. In this sense, I think what is important is that those classes are dependent on the patronage of the elite and wealthy business/political leaders. Therefore to some degree the entertainer classes project the four masks.

I think a better analogy is to the gladiators of ancient Rome or the Charioteers of Byzantium. I suspect that members of the "entertainment classes" in many countries have a much stronger affinity with the common people than with the wealthy. (BTW, I think this is true in the US.)

How does one explain that pro sports figures and actors/actresses get away with the kinds of scandalous and down-right illegal behaviors that would put the common person behind bars for a long time? I suspect it is allowed as a form of anti-hero behavior that gives the great mass of folks an opportunity to be vicariously "naughty" without fear of reprisal.

[Ron Humphrey]

I think a better analogy is to the gladiators of ancient Rome or the Charioteers of Byzantium. I suspect that members of the "entertainment classes" in many countries have a much stronger affinity with the common people than with the wealthy. (BTW, I think this is true in the US.)

How does one explain that pro sports figures and actors/actresses get away with the kinds of scandalous and down-right illegal behaviors that would put the common person behind bars for a long time? I suspect it is allowed as a form of anti-hero behavior that gives the great mass of folks an opportunity to be vicariously "naughty" without fear of reprisal.

IMHO there really needs to be a recognition of the fact that technological, social, monetary, and other changes in the global society as a whole have led to a plethura of newly designated "class" like groups within which the entire spectrum exist. Aside from the examples you referenced consider Geekdom for one. Groups built on relationship to a given skillset, you have your hero's and villains, your rich your poor, highly educated and not so educated, etc.

Or how about the socio-political implications from fame developed through new media?

[AmericanPride]

Addendum to my argument (and then I will explain my answer(s) to wm's and Ron's questions/statements):

Every society has a 'hub of power' (similar in concept to Clausewitz's center of gravity). This is the thing or sum of things from which power is derived. It can be a characteristic, locality, resource, or capability, or any combination of those things. Essentially, it's the centerpiece that holds a system together. The hub has an orbit within which (its 'reach') move about various classes. The power of a class is determined by its relationship/proximity to the hub and other classes. Some classes may have such a proximity that they are able to project their own influencers upon the hub itself (i.e. patrons). Some classes have no impact whatsoever (alienated classes; slaves). Some are in between (plebs). The more similar classes' proximity, the more competitive and democratic the society. The more dissimilar, the more submissive and autocratic the society. Beyond the hub's orbit is everything outside that society. Some hubs' orbits may be small or large, or overlap with one another. Hubs attract classes like moths to flame. The classes then use the four masks to justify/explain their conditions, their actions, and their relationships. The classes closest to the hub distribute resources, knowledge, wealth, and prestige according to the values they define for the masks in justification of their own position, building systems of patronage. The patronage systems are reflected in the masks. Sometimes the patronage is deliberate (i.e. Saudi Arabia), sometimes its ad hoc (United States IMO), and sometimes its unintentional.

Using that model, I'd explain the privilege of entertainers and athletes as a function of their patronage. They get away with it because they can.

[slapout9]

Addendum to my argument (and then I will explain my answer(s) to wm's and Ron's questions/statements):

Every society has a 'hub of power' (similar in concept to Clausewitz's center of gravity). This is the thing or sum of things from which power is derived. It can be a characteristic, locality, resource, or capability, or any combination of those things. Essentially, it's the centerpiece that holds a system together. The hub has an orbit within which (its 'reach') move about various classes. The power of a class is determined by its relationship/proximity to the hub and other classes. Some classes may have such a proximity that they are able to project their own influencers upon the hub itself (i.e. patrons). Some classes have no impact whatsoever (alienated classes; slaves). Some are in between (plebs). The more similar classes' proximity, the more competitive and democratic the society. The more dissimilar, the more submissive and autocratic the society. Beyond the hub's orbit is everything outside that society. Some hubs' orbits may be small or large, or overlap with one another. Hubs attract classes like moths to flame. The classes then use the four masks to justify/explain their conditions, their actions, and their relationships. The classes closest to the hub distribute resources, knowledge, wealth, and prestige according to the values they define for the masks in justification of their own position, building systems of patronage. The patronage systems are reflected in the masks. Sometimes the patronage is deliberate (i.e. Saudi Arabia), sometimes its ad hoc (United States IMO), and sometimes its unintentional.

Using that model, I'd explain the privilege of entertainers and athletes as a function of their patronage. They get away with it because they can.

AmPride, you may not realize this but what you just said is almost straight from one of Colonel Warden's classes on his 5 rings analysis about systems. In general I think you are very much on to something. Keep explaining it if you don't mind. How would you operationalize this? This is one of most detailed Fractal analysis of Ring 4 Population Groups I have seen...again good stuff!