中產(chǎn)，不只關(guān)乎收入

By Noah Smith

My late grandmother drilled1 into our heads that we were middle class. To her， this was a source of great pride； being middle class wasnt just better than being poor， it was also better than being rich. And she apparently wasnt alone. Surveys consistently find that most Americans consider themselves middle class. Although making more than $100，000 a year puts a household in the top 30 percent of the U.S. income distribution， a 2015 Pew survey found that most such people use some form of the label “middle class”to describe themselves.2

Some of this may be due to differences in local living costs—$100，000 is a great income in rural Kansas， but doesnt allow for much luxury in San Francisco. But some is probably due to the value Americans place on the idea of being middle class. Like my grandmother， they want to see themselves as being neither rich nor poor.

Where does this desire come from？ For lower-income people， the desire to identify as middle class is clearly aspirational3. For higher earners， it may come from a sense of social humility； placing oneself above ones fellow citizens can appear unseemly and arrogant.4 But the desire to be seen as middle class isnt strictly personal. By wanting to identify as middle class， people like my grandmother are also expressing a desire to live in a middle-class society.

我國(guó)古語(yǔ)有云：不患寡而患不均。而在美國(guó)，即便資產(chǎn)足夠雄厚，人們也更愿意把自己歸為中產(chǎn)階級(jí)。或許，人人都希望生活在一個(gè)相對(duì)平等的社會(huì)，而自己在其中的位置，最好也相對(duì)中立。那么，如何實(shí)現(xiàn)這一理想呢？

Theres plenty of evidence that visible signs of social inequality bother lots of people. For example， a recent paper by political scientists Melissa Sands and Daniel de Kadt found that when people in South Africa saw an expensive car， their willingness to raise taxes on the wealthy increased. Plenty of economics experiments in lab settings have found strong aversion5 to inequality.

Of course， there are many possible reasons for these effects. One is simply that poor people are envious or resentful of the rich. But this doesnt explain why many people seem to feel uncomfortable having more than others. In a common experiment called the dictator6 game， involving the division of a pot of money， subjects who have the power to keep all the money for themselves tend to give some of it away. And when the so-called dictator has the power to divide money up among others， he or she tends to prefer an equitable distribution.

Furthermore， surveys regularly find that Americans underestimate the amount of inequality in their midst7—although this could be due to simple ignorance， or an illusion created by neighborhoods where most people have similar incomes. But it also probably reflects wishful thinking. The idea of an unequal society probably offends many people， even those on top of the hierarchy8.

Understanding exactly how and why inequality bothers people is the key to creating a happier society. Traditional remedies include redistribution of income and wealth through taxation， as well as so-called predistribution—reshaping the economic system to produce more equal market outcomes—through unions and other pro-worker institutions.9

Although compressing the distribution might be good， there may be additional approaches that foster a broader middle-class sensibility.10 Reducing actual inequality is good， but reducing visible status differences along a few important dimensions may also be helpful.

For example， theres public space. In a society where beaches are private， communities are gated and open space is fenced off， people without access to the land are constantly reminded of their subordinate position in society.11 But public parks， beaches， roads and other common areas create a feeling of inclusiveness and equality. These are spaces where the wealthy mingle with those of lesser means12 on a plane of rough equality—he may have a more expensive beach umbrella， but on a public beach a rich person is just another human being sharing the same sand and water as everyone else. Public transportation is similar—when the wealthy ride the same local trains as common laborers， it creates a space where visible status differences are reduced.

Housing can also help reduce perceptions of glaring disparity.13 When wealthy people live in mansions and poor people in shacks14， it provides a constant reminder of inequality. But building public housing or subsidized rental units in dense cities allows low-income people to have dwellings that， while not the same as multimilliondollar condominiums， are not wildly different either.15 The suburbs， whose sprawl is often bad for the environment but provides many lower-income people with the opportunity to own a free-standing home，16 can also provide a form of equality—especially if the government assists people of modest means to own their own homes.

A third example is public education. Integration17 of school districts puts kids from wealthier backgrounds in the same classes and the same social settings as kids of lower socioeconomic18 status. They eat at the same tables， do the same homework and （mostly） join the same clubs.

In addition to compressing the income and wealth distributions， therefore， society can foster a middle-class esprit by providing public goods and services—spaces and institutions that reduce or eliminate invidious status differences.19 This is a way to justify peoples perceptions of being middle class， and cement20 the idea that we live in a middle-class society. Its a way to encourage people to connect with their common humanity， and with the broader communities of their cities and their nations. Ultimately， that connection and feeling of commonality21 might really be what defines the middle class.

1. drill sth. into sb./sb.s head：

（通過(guò)練習(xí)）反復(fù)灌輸。

2. 2015年皮尤研究中心的調(diào)查顯示，有些家庭盡管年收入超過(guò)10萬(wàn)美元，在美國(guó)屬于前30%的水平，但依然愿意用“中產(chǎn)階級(jí)”一類的標(biāo)簽來(lái)形容自己。Pew： 皮尤研究中心，美國(guó)的一家獨(dú)立民調(diào)機(jī)構(gòu)和智庫(kù)機(jī)構(gòu)。

3. aspirational： 有志向的，渴望獲得更大成功的。

4. humility： 謙恭，謙遜；unseemly： 不恰當(dāng)?shù)?，不得體的；arrogant： 傲慢的，自大的。

5. aversion： 厭惡，反感。

6. dictator： 獨(dú)裁者。游戲中受試者可以隨意分配財(cái)富，故稱之為獨(dú)裁者。

7. in their midst： 在他們當(dāng)中。

8. hierarchy： 等級(jí)制度。

9. 傳統(tǒng)的補(bǔ)救方法是通過(guò)稅收對(duì)收入和財(cái)富進(jìn)行再分配，或者通過(guò)工會(huì)和其他有利于工人的組織，重新規(guī)劃經(jīng)濟(jì)體制，使市場(chǎng)結(jié)果更為公平，也即所謂的“預(yù)分配”。remedy：補(bǔ)救方法。

10. compress： 壓縮；foster： 促進(jìn)，培養(yǎng)。

11. 如果有一個(gè)社會(huì)，沙灘是私人的，小區(qū)設(shè)了門(mén)禁，很多露天場(chǎng)所都被圍了起來(lái)，那么，那些進(jìn)不去的人就總會(huì)覺(jué)得自己的社會(huì)地位低人一等。subordinate：下級(jí)的，處于次要地位的。

12. means： [復(fù)數(shù)] 金錢(qián)，財(cái)富。

13. glaring：（負(fù)面事物）顯眼的，易見(jiàn)的；disparity： 不平等，差異。

14. shack： 簡(jiǎn)陋小屋，棚屋。

15. 如果在人口稠密的城市建造公房或廉租房，使低收入群體也住有所居，雖然比不上造價(jià)高昂的公寓樓，但差別也不至于太大。subsidize： 給……津貼；condominium： 公寓大樓。

16. sprawl：（建筑群或市鎮(zhèn)的）無(wú)計(jì)劃發(fā)展；free-standing： 獨(dú)立的。

17. integration： 融合，整合。

18. socioeconomic： 社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)的。

19. esprit： 精神；invidious： 招致不滿的，激起怨恨的。

20. cement： 加強(qiáng)，鞏固。

21. commonality： 共同特性，共性。

閱讀感評(píng)

∷秋葉 評(píng)

馬克思、恩格斯在《共產(chǎn)黨宣言》（1848）中將當(dāng)時(shí)的歐洲社會(huì)劃分為兩大階級(jí)：資產(chǎn)階級(jí)與無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)。他們認(rèn)為前者掌握生產(chǎn)資料并獲得大部分勞動(dòng)成果，而后者一無(wú)所有，僅靠出賣(mài)勞動(dòng)力來(lái)賺取報(bào)酬以維持基本的生活。因此，兩個(gè)階級(jí)屬于剝削與被剝削、壓迫與被壓迫的關(guān)系，其矛盾對(duì)立無(wú)法調(diào)和，階級(jí)斗爭(zhēng)貫穿資本主義社會(huì)的始終。到了大約一個(gè)半世紀(jì)后的今天，時(shí)代特征與社會(huì)面貌已發(fā)生了巨大的變化，《共產(chǎn)黨宣言》里關(guān)于階級(jí)或階層的分析與判斷未必符合當(dāng)前的實(shí)際情況，但有些東西恐怕基本上是不會(huì)變化的，或者說(shuō)屬于人類社會(huì)的常態(tài)，如貧富的分化、階級(jí)（階層）的分野以及由此產(chǎn)生的對(duì)立情緒與社會(huì)問(wèn)題等。那么，在這講求平等和諧的社會(huì)里，如何才能淡化這些不良因素的存在感呢？在這個(gè)世界上幾乎被一致認(rèn)可的辦法就是最大限度地?cái)U(kuò)大中產(chǎn)階級(jí)，哪怕是種“中產(chǎn)心態(tài)”也好！

中產(chǎn)階級(jí)是個(gè)相當(dāng)寬泛的概念，幾乎涵蓋了所有靠自己的勞動(dòng)（包括腦力與體力）所得，能滿足至少是基本的物質(zhì)與精神生活需求的社會(huì)人群。美國(guó)學(xué)者保羅·富塞爾（Paul Fussell）在其分析美國(guó)社會(huì)階層的論著《格調(diào)：社會(huì)等級(jí)與生活品味》（Class： A Guide Through the American Status System， 1983）里，將整個(gè)美國(guó)社會(huì)粗分為三大階層，即Top（上層）、Center（中層）與Bottom（底層），然后又將每個(gè)階層細(xì)分為若干層級(jí)，其中Center從高到低依次分為Middle（中產(chǎn)）、High Proletarian（工人階級(jí)高層）、Mid-Proletarian（工人階級(jí)中層）與Low

Proletarian（工人階級(jí)低層）四類。

原文標(biāo)題的“Being Middle Class Isnt Just a Matter of Income”（成為中產(chǎn)階級(jí)并不僅僅靠收入多寡）并未對(duì)Middle Class進(jìn)行較為明確的經(jīng)濟(jì)定義與社會(huì)定位，而是強(qiáng)調(diào)該階層的價(jià)值觀和心態(tài)對(duì)于社會(huì)公平與幸福感所發(fā)揮的強(qiáng)大作用。原文認(rèn)為，廁身中產(chǎn)階層不僅有幸脫離了貧困，還要好過(guò)富裕階層，原因是人們自知生活水平超越他人會(huì)覺(jué)不妥并顯得傲慢，只有“天下為公、人人平等”才能心安理得。因此，人們一門(mén)心思要生活在中產(chǎn)社會(huì)之中。顯然，這種認(rèn)識(shí)與我們平常對(duì)于人類總是力圖“往上爬”（climb the social ladder）并設(shè)法“與眾不同”（make a difference）的本性的印象頗為相左，帶有比較濃烈的理想化傾向。上文提到的富塞爾就認(rèn)為，中產(chǎn)階級(jí)總是急于同低于它的階層拉開(kāi)距離，并千方百計(jì)地強(qiáng)調(diào)其往上爬的訴求，于是他們?cè)谕獗硌b束、語(yǔ)言使用等外在形式上，都要顯得與眾不同并且自命不凡。在這位美國(guó)作者看來(lái)，中產(chǎn)階級(jí)處于白領(lǐng)的底層，數(shù)量最多，但他們總是試圖讓他人誤認(rèn)為自己屬于中上層階級(jí)（Upper Middle Class，是Top一層的最低層），擺出自己的“好品味”。原因很簡(jiǎn)單，中上層階級(jí)是他們的夢(mèng)想階層，雖然這個(gè)階層的人士照樣得工作，但他們卻是“金領(lǐng)”，或者“白領(lǐng)”中的佼佼者。

其實(shí)，原文的主旨并非在談?wù)撍^的中產(chǎn)階級(jí)，而是在為社會(huì)的穩(wěn)定與和諧支招兒。在作者看來(lái)，中產(chǎn)階級(jí)的價(jià)值觀最有益于一個(gè)穩(wěn)定、和諧、幸福社會(huì)的創(chuàng)建，因此中產(chǎn)階級(jí)應(yīng)成為整個(gè)社會(huì)的標(biāo)桿，即便是對(duì)于那些在硬指標(biāo)上“尚未達(dá)標(biāo)”的階層，社會(huì)上也得營(yíng)造出一種讓他們感覺(jué)“靠近中產(chǎn)”的軟環(huán)境，最大限度地?cái)U(kuò)大公共資源，讓人們共享共有，以營(yíng)造一種包容與平等的氛圍。誠(chéng)然，等級(jí)之間的差異是客觀存在的，任何時(shí)代、任何社會(huì)都無(wú)法改變。其外在上的顯著表現(xiàn)無(wú)非是住宅、娛樂(lè)場(chǎng)所、交通工具、教育機(jī)構(gòu)以及外表裝扮等等。然而，如果我們盡量淡化上述的等級(jí)指標(biāo)（indicator of class），就可以在很大程度上消解因不良攀比（invidious comparison）而導(dǎo)致的不同階層的“羨慕嫉妒恨”，從而超越階層鴻溝。