New Petite Bourgeoisie
Contextual Quote
"The Petite Bourgeoisie — in both its old and new forms — has always been a transitional class. By this, I mean that those within it can easily be shunted back down into the working class through sudden economic disruptions or downturns of fortunes. But where the old Petite Bourgeoisie usually has some physical wealth (a house, a workshop, a storefront, manual tools, etc) to fall back upon, the New Petite Bourgeoisie has nothing. That makes them less resilient and therefore more terrified of these changes. And because they’re so precarious, they’re more likely to support and even agitate for politics and politicians that keep the current neoliberal order together.
That’s why they supported Kamala Harris despite her having no other policy platform except “more of the same.” That’s also why they so vehemently opposed Brexit in the UK, and why they’re so eager to see EU expansion in Europe. Any alteration of the previous “progress” that created their class in the first place means they’ll have to join the faceless mass of regular workers that Blair, Clinton, and Obama each promised they could finally escape.
And that’s especially why they hate Trump so much. Not only does he not speak for them, but he speaks to the very classes against whom they’ve constructed their entire personal identities and moral constellations.
But let’s be clear: their hatred is a borrowed hatred. It’s really the PMC and the internationalist capitalists who have the most to lose from someone like Trump."
- Rhyd Wildermuth [1]
Description
Rhyd Wildermuth:
"The New Petite Bourgeoisie (NPB from here on out) are more urban, and they mostly share the following characteristics:
- They usually have university degrees or a higher level education
- They are self-employed or work as independent contractors, but usually in “intellectual” work rather than manual work
- They have little or no material capital — if they have a business, it’s usually entirely online, or is a temporary “pop up” shop.
- They are downward-mobile or definitely feel as if they are. Many are constantly at risk of needing to take an extra “gig” job because their primary business isn’t paying enough, and they feel pressure to downsize their lives — like going car-less, taking on roommates if they own a house, or moving to cheaper areas.
Another common theme you see with the NPB is that they tend to share the disgust the Professional-Managerial Class (PMC from here on out) has for the working class.
This last bit is a significant difference between the NPB and the traditional (or “old”) Petite Bourgeoisie. The traditional Petite Bourgeoisie tends to side with workers’ concerns quite often, even sometimes supporting revolutionary actions. Again, part of this is due to social and physical proximity — most of their friends, neighbors, and family members are working class. But also, part of this is self-interest: since they deal most often with the working class, to oppose them is to commit a kind of financial suicide."
(https://rhyd.substack.com/p/are-we-the-baddies)
Discussion
The NPB “left” versus the working class
Rhyd Wildermuth:
"On the other hand, this new urban Petite Bourgeoisie, the NPB, is actually quite disgusted with working-class values, concerns, and even just their daily lives.1 The biggest determiner of the NPB’s disdain for these cultural forms — and for the working class itself — seems to be their university training. That’s because, at least for the past few decades, university degrees have been sold to people as a way to lift themselves out of the muck and despair of being just an ordinary waged worker. Going to college means you can escape the small-town mindset of your family and childhood friends, or get something “better” in life than just working in a factory or as a grocery store clerk.
Now, again, Dan Evans noticed that the “left” in the UK hasn’t really represented working-class values or concerns for a few decades, and that’s what’s happened in the United States, too. That’s because what we call the “left” is mostly dominated by a mix of the NPB and the PMC, while the working class tends instead to vote for conservatives. There are lots of reasons for this, but their alliance to the right is primarily based on conservative promises of social stability, less globalized trade, and more national-based investment.
To see how this plays out now, take Donald Trump’s proposed tariffs and immigration policies. Tariffs would especially benefit the old Petite Bourgeoisie and also many traditional industrial workers. Consider: when’s the last time anyone hired an electrician to fix a broken toaster or coffee maker? And when’s the last time you’ve seen either of those with a “made in the USA” sticker on the box?
That kind of production doesn’t happen in the US or the UK any longer. It’s all being produced in Chinese factories, which means there are lots of people in the West who aren’t working in factories anymore. Also, the services the old Petite Bourgeoisie offered (fixing your toaster, for example, or even selling you that toaster) aren’t valuable in a system where you can just get whatever you need or replace anything within 48 hours with a product created halfway across the world with Amazon one-click.
Trump’s tariffs plan is meant to change that. Even if it doesn’t succeed, Trump’s tariffs are a sign to the working class and the old Petite Bourgeoisie that he actually understands their situation. As in 2016, when Hillary Clinton kept telling workers they were stupid for thinking the economy wasn’t as good as they said it was, the Democrats again acted completely oblivious to these material conditions and lost spectacularly to a man reckless enough to speak a bit of truth.
And immigration is a similar situation. Most immigrants to the US and the UK compete with the working class — rather than the NPB — for jobs. An immigrant dude from Mexico isn’t an economic threat to some Oakland hipster’s online witch candle shop, nor is he going to reduce the subscriber base for a Brooklynite non-binary life coach’s OnlyFans or Patreon account. Instead, he’s probably going to take a job in construction or road work. And he, and his fellow immigrants, will do that work for less than the prevailing wage, meaning his presence pushes wages down for other workers, too — but has no effect at all on the NPB or the PMC.
There are countless other examples of this. But essentially, Trump’s policies seem good for the old Petite Bourgeoisie and for the working class, whether or not they are actually going to help.
On the other hand, the NPB and the PMC both viciously hate and fear Trump. There are also lots of reasons with this, and they’re all seen as moral and political reasons, but the most important thing to understand is that Trump’s policies — and the policies of conservatives in general — don’t represent their economic interests. In fact, some of these policies would actually harm their economic situation."
(https://rhyd.substack.com/p/are-we-the-baddies)
Why do the NPB hate Trump ?
Rhyd Wildermuth:
" essentially, Trump’s policies seem good for the old Petite Bourgeoisie and for the working class, whether or not they are actually going to help.
On the other hand, the NPB and the PMC both viciously hate and fear Trump. There are also lots of reasons with this, and they’re all seen as moral and political reasons, but the most important thing to understand is that Trump’s policies — and the policies of conservatives in general — don’t represent their economic interests. In fact, some of these policies would actually harm their economic situation.
It’s easiest to see this with the PMC, those upper-tier, highly-educated urbanites who work in corporations, technology, universities, media, and other related professions. Many of them are working for large institutions that rely heavily on a shrinking industrial base and a growing intellectual-work economy. And they don’t just move and shape information, they train, manage, “influence,” and entertain the people who work in those sectors.
Think of all the DEI or business management consultants, all the tech-company project managers, all the directors of human resource departments or of non-profits, all the professors of gender studies or college admissions heads, and all the people employed within these institutions who only ever get their hands dirty in hobby gardens. Such people do really damn well under the current neoliberal arrangement, and they are also quite terrified of the increasingly-angry working class seething far below them.2
Fear of Falling Now, the NPB aren’t the PMC, but they have similar outlooks. They both ascribe to social justice (or “woke”) moral constellations, and they both share a fear and disdain for the working class. For the PMC, that disdain is more like arrogant contempt, but for the NPB it’s more a visceral fear that they might soon have to join them.
That’s the final important part of the NPB’s current situation. They — or we, because I’m technically also part of this class despite having no university degree — are all downwardly-mobile. Give any of us just a few weeks of no clients, no customers, or no subscribers and we suddenly start seriously considering getting a “real” (waged) job. Give most of us two months of that kind of bad luck, and we’re probably also moving back in with parents, family, or friends — even if we’re in our forties.
So the NPB is a deeply precarious transitional class, despite acting as if they’re established and dominant. That’s because they’re most like the PMC and are constantly hoping to enter that class. We’re the adjunct professors hoping for tenure, the small-scale internet influencers hoping to finally go viral, the Substack and Patreon and OnlyFans accounts fantasizing about six figures, and all the “gig” workers dreaming of remote work in Berlin or Lisbon funded by a modest but reliable passive income.
And what’s most ridiculous is that it’s both the NPB and the PMC who constitute what is now called “the left,” while the working class and the old Petite Bourgeoisie are now most represented by politicians from “the right.” Of course, little of what used to be meant by either of those terms maps onto what we now mean by them.
“Left” especially doesn’t mean Marxist/anti-capitalist left anymore, but rather Neo-Liberal “Left.” Instead of organized attempts to increase wages and worker protections, and to force restraints on capitalist disruptions (the gig economy/internet of things, massive immigration, etc), the Neo-Liberal Left has focused on identity concerns and technocratic change, and that latter bit is especially the opposite of what workers actually want and need.
Consider, for example, all the punitive environmental policies like increased taxes on gas and forced switches to electric cars. These are seen as “left” policies, but when they are implemented (as France tried to do), they spark massive working-class protest movement — the gilets jaunes — that then get smeared as “fascist.” The thing is, such policies affect them greatly, but they don’t touch the PMC or the NPB since they can either easily afford increased costs or don’t drive in the first place.
Other technocratic changes also had similar effects and showed the steep divide between the class alignments."