Comment by edblarney
9 years ago
If you didn't know you were 'upper class' then you were definitely not, although I grasp what you are saying.
'Upper class' means generational wealth and status, your grandfather was wealthy, a diplomat, and admiral, head of a large multinational, and you can trace your lineage back at least 8 generations, and likely back to before you were even Americans ... your family has had status for that long.
But yes - some people have 'high standards of behaviour', are genteel, polite, articulate, conscientious, well mannered etc. but don't have a lot of money. Many upper-middle class, even middle class types were like this just a generation and a half ago. I suggest fewer people are exactly that now, as the mores of society have shifted quite a lot in many ways.
My mother's mother was from a low level noble family. The family sold the title. Or so I have been told.
Um ... my family has been tracked back to John "Tuscarora Jack" Barnwell (came to the colonies in 1701---https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Barnwell_(colonist)) but I'm not "upper class" my any means. I'm not sure what you meant by that.
That you can trace your lineage, does not mean you are 'upper class'. But 'upper class' people can usually trace their lineage quite far back.
Everybody in the upper class definitely knows they are in the upper class. It's not a 'revelation' you get when you are an adult.
Likely quite a few people think they are in the upper class and really are not.
I'm going by classical definition here, not the 'new world' American version of upper class, which is usually just economic.
> I'm going by classical definition here, not the 'new world' American version of upper class, which is usually just economic.
That's not the definition used by the person you're replying to, so I'm not sure what your point is.
2 replies →
Irrelevant truths are worse than relevant lies.