Same, but Different: Within London's ‘Static’ Class Structure and the Missing Antagonism
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
City analysis of urban trends, culture, theory, policy, action ISSN: 1360-4813 (Print) 1470-3629 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ccit20 Same, but different: Within London's ‘static’ class structure and the missing antagonism Mark Davidson & Elvin Wyly To cite this article: Mark Davidson & Elvin Wyly (2015) Same, but different: Within London's ‘static’ class structure and the missing antagonism, City, 19:2-3, 247-257, DOI: 10.1080/13604813.2015.1014709 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13604813.2015.1014709 Published online: 01 Apr 2015. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 216 View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ccit20 Download by: [Mark Davidson] Date: 06 April 2016, At: 16:55 CITY, 2015 VOL. 19, NOS. 2–3, 247–257, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13604813.2015.1014709 Same, but different Within London’s ‘static’ class structure and the missing antagonism Mark Davidson and Elvin Wyly In this paper, we discuss (Manley, D., and R. Johnston. 2014. ‘London: A Dividing City, 2001–11?’ City 18 (6): 633–643) intervention into recent debates on London’s contempor- ary class structure. We find that Manley and Johnston show evidence to support many of the claims we have previously made, providing further support against the argument that London has become increasingly a middle-class (Butler, T., C. Hamnett, and M. Ramsden. 2008. ‘Inward and Upward? Marking Out Social Class Change in London 1981–2001.’ Urban Studies 45 (2): 67–88) and/or professionalized (Hamnett, C. 2004. ‘Economic and Social Change and Inequality in Global Cities: The Case of London.’ The Greek Review of Social Research 113: 63–80) city. Yet Manley and Johnston’s account- ing of class change in London also requires critical consideration. We argue their description of London as static in terms of class change has to be read extremely carefully, since such descriptions can obscure the vast population shifts that have occurred in London over recent decades. We also question the extent to which a concern with class antagonism is absent from their intervention. In conclusion, we reflect on what recent talk of London’s social class composition means for working-class politics. Key words: London, class, working class, Marxism, struggle Downloaded by [Mark Davidson] at 16:55 06 April 2016 Introduction why would anyone pay that amount for such a small house? At a price that is out ew urban issues generate headlines of reach for most salaried workers, it is a like London’s housing market. Last reasonable enough question. But, of FSeptember, North American media course, this question leads to many more outlets picked up on the listing of a ‘one- thoughts. They include the implied bedroom terraced house’ in Barnsbury, notion that London must be (a) full of North London, priced at £275,000. For people who can afford to pay staggering this small fortune, the buyer got 188 sq. ft amounts for even the smallest properties of living space (Osbourne 2014). The and (b) that any average or below-average estate agent selling the house guessed it income earner without wealth cannot live was ‘possibly the smallest house in the in and/or move to the city. world’ (Osbourne 2014, n.p.). Media In this context, the recent contribution of reports that circulated about the tiny one- Manley and Johnston (2014) to debates on room house were asking a simple question: London’s class structure and geography is a # 2015 Taylor & Francis 248 CITY VOL. 19, NOS.2–3 welcome intervention. As they themselves Hamnett, and Ramsden 2008). This interpret- note, there is now a prevalent mythology ation of class transition, we argued, created that surrounds cities like London (641– empirical fodder for those propagating the 642), one that sees them becoming overrun idea of a post-industrial city prospectively by plutocrats and mega-rich bankers. Such devoid of class difference and filled with narrations, as we will discuss below, are utopian creativity (Florida 2002). We there- incredibly powerful devices that shape both fore welcome Manley and Johnston’s (2014) academic and public1 debate over urban contribution to debates over London’s class change (Beaverstock, Hubbard, and Rennie composition since it questions the extent to Short 2014). Such narratives signal to the which London has become a space dominated ongoing and urgent need for critical empirical by middle-class population growth. While and theoretical work that understands the their paper is certainly no ringing endorse- social changes which are occurring in global ment of our previous contributions (David- capitalism’s core regions. son and Wyly 2012, 2013), they appear to In this paper, we will examine the empirical agree with our characterization of London’s claims of Manley and Johnston (2014), before class composition as persistent (in terms of turning to consider the politics of their epis- class composition), as opposed to transform- temology. The sections which immediately ing (i.e. ‘social upgrading2’; Butler, Hamnett, follow will discuss Manley and Johnston’s and Ramsden 2008). empirical analysis of 2001 and 2011 census data on London’s class structure. We note that there are a number of significant contri- Occupational stability? butions in their work that confirm and extend much of our own previous analysis Manley and Johnston (2014) investigate the (Davidson and Wyly 2012, 2013). Following class structure of London in 2001 and 2011 this we revisit some of the theoretical argu- by compiling NS-SEC (National Statistics ments we have made previously (Davidson Socio-economic Classification) categories and Wyly 2012, 2013) relating to the relation- into three main classes: (1) ‘traditional’ ship between class structure and class antag- middle class, comprising of employers, man- onism. In particular, we consider how the agers and professionals (NS-SEC 1 and 2), empiricism of Manley and Johnston’s (2014) (2) the service class (NS-SEC 3.2, 3.4, 4.1, contribution might limit further debate 4.3, 7.3, 10, 12.7 and 13.1) and (3) the ‘tra- about social class in London. ditional’ working class of skilled, semi- Downloaded by [Mark Davidson] at 16:55 06 April 2016 skilled and unskilled manual occupations (NS-SEC 7.4, 11.1, 11.2, 12.2, 12.3, 12.4, The messy empirics of the middle 13.2 and 13.3) (634). They use these broad groupings to compare the social composition In our initial intervention (Davidson and of Census Output Areas (OAs) (n ¼ 24,200) Wyly 2012) into debates surrounding in 2001 and 2011. In comparing the percen- London’s current class composition (also tage of the OAs comprised of each of these see Buck et al. 2002; Hamnett 2003a, 2003b, three groups, Manley and Johnston state 2004; Butler, Hamnett, and Ramsden 2008; that ‘[T]he main conclusion to be drawn is Watt 2008), we attempted to question how of little overall structural change, within a the city’s post-industrial present and future substantially increased (31%) workforce was being understood (see Butler, Hamnett, over the decade’ (634). They continue: ‘ ... and Ramsden 2008). We set out to critique there is certainly no evidence that either the how unreliable census data has been used to traditional middle class or the service class present an image of London as becoming an are numerically crowding out the other increasingly middle-class city (Butler, groups’ (634). Stability, rather than change, DAVIDSON AND WYLY: SAME, BUT DIFFERENT 249 is found to characterize London’s social class witness to drastic social changes; as Manley status between 2001 and 2011. and Johnston (2014) note in multiple stages This finding is supportive of our previous of their analysis. While these might have argument (Davidson and Wyly 2013) that occurred within the context of relatively London’s social geography has remained per- stable occupational composition (i.e. percen- sistent over time, and that this includes the tage of London’s population comprised of continued presence of working-class people certain classes), viewed from other perspec- across the city. As such, Manley and Johnston tives we do see significant changes (Davidson (2014) agree with us that ‘[T]he middle class and Wyly 2012; Johnston, Poulsen, and is not taking over and the working class is Forrest 2014). For example, the ethnic and not being forced out—some of whose racial composition of London’s working members have affinities with the middle class has undergone significant shifts. In rather than the working class and vice versa’ addition, the occupations (and related work (641). The professionalization thesis conditions) associated with working-class (Hamnett 1994, 2003a) that is used to under- positions have shifted dramatically. The score the claims made in Butler, Hamnett, archetypal English working class (skilled and Ramsden (2008) is therefore disproven, manual occupations, white, etc.) now is a at least for the 2001–11 period. The small segment of the city’s proletariat (see working population of London has certainly Davidson and Wyly 2012). Much of this expanded, but over the past decade this population has been replaced by a diversity growth has not been concentrated in any par- of peoples who likely share little in ticular class; at least to the extent that census common but class position. The descriptor data can indicate. ‘stability’ therefore requires careful and Making sense of these findings with specified usage when applied to London’s regards to a more general theory of post- changing class composition. industrial urbanism (Bell 1974; Sassen 2001) The shifting composition of London’s remains a complex task. One might suggest working classes, both in terms of occupation that the 2001–11 period is not the right and identity, has been examined in many place to look in terms of social class trans- important studies in recent years (e.g.