Higher Social Class Predicts Unethical Behavior

[FireDragon76]

Middle- and Upper- class people are more likely to do unethical things when faced with temptation, than working-class people:

Higher social class predicts increased unethical behavior

And a more in depth article article on social class as culture, with an explanation of the different values between America's middle class, and the working-class:

Understanding Social Class as Culture - Behavioral Scientist

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

Sense of entitlement and/or confidence that they have a greater chance of getting away with such behavior with little or no consequences. A sense of immunity. That would be my guess as to the phenomenon.

 

[FireDragon76]

Sense of entitlement and/or confidence that they have a greater chance of getting away with such behavior with little or no consequences. A sense of immunity. That would be my guess as to the phenomenon.

The authors suggest that there's less disgust at greedy behavior, less sense of altruism, and more sense of moral autonomy.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Middle- and Upper- class people are more likely to do unethical things when faced with temptation, than working-class people:

Higher social class predicts increased unethical behavior

And a more in depth article article on social class as culture, with an explanation of the different values between America's middle class, and the working-class:

Understanding Social Class as Culture - Behavioral Scientist

I wonder how this study would overlay the group set that involved itself in the attack upon the Capitol last January?

 

[durangodawood]

I wonder how this study would overlay the group set that involved itself in the attack upon the Capitol last January?

That quite a particular subset.

I do think ideological extremists will often put normal ethics in the back seat when their all important political goals are at stake.

 

[grasping the after wind]

I wonder how this study would overlay the group set that involved itself in the attack upon the Capitol last January?

I would assume most of those people were working class. Not too much support for Trump among the wealthy and white collar class. Most of them support the Democratic Party. Then again those are not social class distinctions but a economic class distinctions which seems to have been lost on the people analyzing the statistics in the articles the OP referenced. .

 

[FireDragon76]

I wonder how this study would overlay the group set that involved itself in the attack upon the Capitol last January?

I've been thinking just that- how the number of affluent and middle class people in that mob was surprisingly high, with little of the stereotypes of Trump supporters as poor, rural whites.

It's also lead me to reflecting more on an Atlantic article on the Creative Class becoming an elite, and how its coincided with American decline, echoing similar concerns. And it's lead to the rise of a counterpoint to the Creative Class: the Boorish Bourgeois (many of whom have gravitated towards nationalist and political extremism):

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2021/09/blame-the-bobos-creative-class/619492/

I would assume most of those people were working class. Not too much support for Trump among the wealthy and white collar class.

The Jan. 6 mob were disproportionately middle class, not working class. Trump had plenty of wealthy donors and supporters, and it's misleading to see his base as hapless, disposessed underdogs (service workers, who tend to be Democrats or apolitical, are the actual "underdogs" in this narrative). The upper 1 percent of US society are evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans.

I would assume most of those people were working class. Not too much support for Trump among the wealthy and white collar class. Most of them support the Democratic Party. Then again those are not social class distinctions but a economic class distinctions which seems to have been lost on the people analyzing the statistics in the articles the OP referenced. .

Social and economic classes are more or less the same in most western countries. There are some political differences along professional lines (healthcare workers, service workers are more likely to be Democrats, electricians and carpenters are more likely to be Republicans), but that's about as far as it goes outside of looking at economic differences between groups of people.

 

[bèlla]

It's also lead me to reflecting more on an Atlantic article on the Creative Class becoming an elite

Excellent reply!

If you're interested in the subject I recommend:

Plutocrats
The Complacent Class
The Velvet Rope Economy
Billionaire Wilderness

Trump had plenty of wealthy donors and supporters. The upper 1 percent of US society are evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans.

True. Some donate to both.

~bella

 

[bèlla]

The authors suggest that there's less disgust at greedy behavior, less sense of altruism, and more sense of moral autonomy.

Individualism and drive are highly prized. You're dealing with a sea of go-getters. Greed isn't the motivator for everyone. Money comes easy when you're an overachiever surrounded by others like yourself who are really successful. There's a lot of back scratching and resources stay in the pool.

~bella

 

[FireDragon76]

Individualism and drive are highly prized. You're dealing with a sea of go-getters. Greed isn't the motivator for everyone. Money comes easy when you're an overachiever surrounded by others like yourself who are really successful. There's a lot of back scratching and resources stay in the pool.

~bella

But that's the point- individualism is prized by the wealthy in our society, not as much by poor and working-class people, who value community and relationships more. This can even lead to institutional discrimination against the poor and working class, for instance, in college or job applications, when they have trouble relating to the values of the wealthy in our society.

If we want good governance and a less dysfunctional society, we're going to have to develop more holistic values than just focusing on what a small segment of society deems to be the highest good.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I've been thinking just that- how the number of affluent and middle class people in that mob was surprisingly high, with little of the stereotypes of Trump supporters as poor, rural whites.

It's also lead me to reflecting more on an Atlantic article on the Creative Class becoming an elite, and how its coincided with American decline, echoing similar concerns. And it's lead to the rise of a counterpoint to the Creative Class: the Boorish Bourgeois (many of whom have gravitated towards nationalist and political extremism):

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2021/09/blame-the-bobos-creative-class/619492/



The Jan. 6 mob were disproportionately middle class, not working class. Trump had plenty of wealthy donors and supporters, and it's misleading to see his base as hapless, disposessed underdogs (service workers, who tend to be Democrats or apolitical, are the actual "underdogs" in this narrative). The upper 1 percent of US society are evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans.



Social and economic classes are more or less the same in most western countries. There are some political differences along professional lines (healthcare workers, service workers are more likely to be Democrats, electricians and carpenters are more likely to be Republicans), but that's about as far as it goes outside of looking at economic differences between groups of people.

You need to cite support for your assertions here, FireDragon. You may be correct, but I'll need to see your work in bolstering your analysis.

Thanks!

 

[bèlla]

But that's the point- individualism is prized by the wealthy in our society, not as much by poor and working-class people, who value community and relationships more.

The need is different. The wealthy rely on one another for growth not sustenance. They don't require assistance with basic needs.

This can even lead to institutional discrimination against the poor and working class, for instance, in college or job applications, when they have trouble relating to the values of the wealthy in our society.

I agree. I've experienced it firsthand. If you have the right background or connections doors open.

If we want good governance and a less dysfunctional society, we're going to have to develop more holistic values than just focusing on what a small segment of society deems to be the highest good.

They want to be like them. That's the issue. Look at Christianity. They vent about the rich but the prosperity gospel is thriving. A lot of people want to be wealthy. Including those who don't admit it.

~bella

 

[2PhiloVoid]

But that's the point- individualism is prized by the wealthy in our society, not as much by poor and working-class people, who value community and relationships more. This can even lead to institutional discrimination against the poor and working class, for instance, in college or job applications, when they have trouble relating to the values of the wealthy in our society.

If we want good governance and a less dysfunctional society, we're going to have to develop more holistic values than just focusing on what a small segment of society deems to be the highest good.

I think I can agree with this; but one problem will come in definining and then using whatever "holistic" actually ends up being. It could also be contingent on which and what "small segment" is doing all of the deeming, and how they're doing so.

 

[FireDragon76]

They want to be like them. That's the issue. Look at Christianity. They vent about the rich but the prosperity gospel is thriving. A lot of people want to be wealthy. Including those who don't admit it.

~bella

The prosperity gospel is more a sign of the dysfunction, people emulating destructive values that exhaust a community's social capital, even to the point of seeking spiritual con-men and engaging in wishful thinking.

Of course people want more money. Half of America now are the working poor, many working pink-collar and service jobs that benefit society a great deal, but pay very little. That's different from not having a problem with greed.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Here's something from the Washington Post that I just googled. You might add it for consideration to your article in post #7.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...surrectionists-jenna-ryan-financial-problems/

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Here's another to add:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...at-helps-explain-perceptions-capitol-rioters/

 

[bèlla]

The prosperity gospel is more a sign of the dysfunction, people emulating destructive values that exhaust a community's social capital, even to the point of seeking spiritual con-men and engaging in wishful thinking.

At its core the issue is a longing for wealth. Many covet it. They align with the movement because it gives them the freedom to acknowledge it. They're around others like themselves. You can't talk about money without someone throwing out a scripture. There's a stigma.

That's different from not having a problem with greed.

Enough is subjective. Everybody has a different number. Are you going to standardize the figure and that's the measure for everyone?

~bella

 

[FireDragon76]

Here's something from the Washington Post that I just googled. You might add it for consideration to your article in post #7.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...surrectionists-jenna-ryan-financial-problems/

I think that's more about perceived entitlement than about living paycheck-to-paycheck. Anybody in the US can have financial problems, including the wealthy, but is it about re-arranging some finances, selling a second house... or choosing between food and healthcare, as is not that rare for the working class to have to do?

 

[FireDragon76]

At its core the issue is a longing for wealth. Many covet it. They align with the movement because it gives them the freedom to acknowledge it. They're around others like themselves. You can't talk about money without someone throwing out a scripture. There's a stigma.



Enough is subjective. Everybody has a different number. Are you going to standardize the figure and that's the measure for everyone?

~bella

The aspirations of the working poor for economic security are hardly "greed" in the traditional sense, of wanting more than what is equitable.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I think that's more about perceived entitlement than about living paycheck-to-paycheck. Anybody in the US can have financial problems, including the wealthy, but is it about re-arranging some finances, selling a second house... or choosing between food and healthcare, as is not that rare for the working class to have to do?

Entitlement is likely the big bug-a-boo here, FD. It's probably more so that just the idea of individualism, which I do agree with you isn't always a value that's conducive to empathy and altruism. Individualism is probably one of the driving axioms behind some of the notions of entitlement that sit at the forefront of the minds of a number of folks in our nation.

Unfortunately for those Christians who consider themselves as merely trapsing through life with only an individualized, cafeteria set of social responsibilities and a lifetime subscription to entitlement expectations, they aren't necessarily valuing ideas that comport with those we find in the New Testament.

Still, with all of that said, I do remember growing up among an extended family that didn't provide for an experience of wealth or prosperity, nor for a firm sense of moral accountability. If anything, there were very flabby, general civic ideals about personal rights and personal allowances made without any connection to reading or talking about the Bible, let alone frequently darkening the halls of a church. From personal recall then, I can't say that my experiences reflect the study in the OP, although it may still be true on a more macro scale and perhaps my experiences are a small outlier. I don't know. We were Democrats, too.