We have an under class who probably have little hope of raising their own social status or wealth. These are peasant classes, the serfs who are surplus to requirements.
Then we have a class who earn money and they are now considered "middle class" although they are rooted in the peasant class, and then there are the various upper working clas/middle class tiers, the kind who can afford, for example, to take their children to dance lessons a few times a week.
Then there are the political classes, who are perhaps predominantly now middle to upper middle class with a few of them coming from working class backgrounds, which were once associated with class struggle and poverty. But these latter few are perhaps getting smaller and smaller as the new middle to upper middle were born in more affluent areas of society.
Then we have the Lord and Baron class. This is a step up from the upper middle. Many people who have achieved middle class but came from working class backgrounds can access this particular class (John prescott MP being one of them).
Then we have the top class who are Dukes, Princes, Queens, Kings, etc. These are considered mere props "good for the economy" though we tend to overlook their role in the military, in private business and government institutions, and the activities of their extended family throughout history.
Obviously the UK is entrenched by class divisions. What other place in the world can you think of that has such a towering class superstructure?
Some people say that class doesn't matter. Dennis Skinner MP might disagree with them, for he believed that class is everything! It is the background from where you came and it reflects even if subtly your own value system. Someone from a poorer background will fight against social injustice in society.
Those who come from more affluent backgrounds tend to be less militant in their fight against social injustice, whilst some of them who will not care at all and only see the classes beneath them as tools for political and economic gain.
The further up the chain of command we go we see them as being less connected with those beneath them, particularly at the very top, which is why the top classes have military backgrounds and have the power to engage another country in war. It is not that this top class doesn't understand the "lower orders" it's just that the top class have inherited their position, which is now considered as "tradition" when in fact it is also piracy.
But a consolidated mediocrity is essential for the upper classes to flourish. If everyone was just one class our society would be very different, perhaps for the worst. That's not an argument in favour of class, but an argument against class snobery. Because if it is true that class is required for a great nation then all classes in the class superstructure are integral to one another. In the past this was the Victorian ideal: each class knew its place.
But for some reason the Victorian ideal was overthrown and class was seen as a social injustice as well as a barrier to a happy and long life.
But what do you think?