The Nation -Edwards, it is hoped, will bring the "working class" vote to Obama. In alternative descriptions, he will help with the "middle class" vote; or what a very tired Clinton might call the "white-middle white-class, white-working, white-vote." This (disappearing) working class population fills the pages of analysis and news. In the New York Times, for example, there are 324 references to "middle class," and 220 references to "working class" in the last three months.
At the same time, the "upper class" is vanishing from our language. In the 18 references in the New York Times in the last three months, none are in the context of elections. "Upper class" appears most in quotes, literature review and history, or as a referent to people on the other side of the puddle, as they say, the "upper-class British" way of life appears, as does the "upper-class European" and the upper class voice of a deceased BBC announcer.
In America, we don't have the upper class, apparently. We have, according to many news reports, "elites." ... "Elites only, folks, elites only for early boarding" cries the Continental Airline steward, and the rich people line up, complimented and convenienced at the same time ... The elite are the chosen, the secular "good men and women", ones we ought make way for as they pass.
...
But importantly, I recoil against the imprecision of the word "elites." It communicates less than it seems and leaves the meaning up to the demographic imagination of the reader. It might mean the rich, it might mean a group of 20 people who have drinks at the Brick Skeller in DC. The "richest 50,000" is precise. People "living below the poverty line" is precise. Anything written by Pew is precise. Elite is vague, and in a way that compliments people who think themselves elite while obscuring the real differences in opportunity and living that people experience.
YahooIs this just another change in expectations? This reminds me when, a few years ago, janitors' job descriptions were changed to Sanitation Engineers.