Impromptu sociology lesson:
This video made me think about sociological theories of wealth as something with multiple parts (not just how much money you have), particularly Pierre Bourdieu. Bourdieu theorized different kinds of capital:
- economic capital (income/property/assets)
- cultural capital (education, tastes, habits, cultural knowledge, incl. financial literacy)
- social capital (your social network/relationships, who you know)
- symbolic capital (reputation, prestige, visibility to others).
Jools’ main source of capital is her symbolic capital. As discussed in this video, being an influencer does not mean consistent economic capital, and it doesn’t magically give her the cultural capital of someone like Charlie d’Amelio & co. to fully capitalize on her virality. While her follower count can be seen as giving her some social capital, her followers are “weak social ties” which can connect her to brand deals and spread her catchphrase, but not “strong social ties” that she can actually rely on for social credit (for example, having been in an upper-class fraternity and becoming friends with future politicians and lawyers and investors who you can rely on). Jools’ stronger relationships are with her family and friends, other working-class people with similarly limited economic and cultural capital.
The ONLY WAY she can actually make use of her symbolic (& limited social) capital IS to use the fact that a lot of people know about her to reach out and request assistance. This is why to me it is honestly insane that people are yelling at her for asking her followers for donations because “she has so many followers!!!” Her making a GoFundMe and asking her followers to donate IS her using what little actual capital she gets from being influencer! Literally the most direct and logical way for her to get the necessary economic capital is to do EXACTLY what she did!!!!!
People conflate these different types of capital and because celebrities are people you are encouraged to be parasocial about and also feel much closer to us than the actual owning class, people take all their repressed working class outrage at capitalism and target it at celebrities who are very visible and who we are often meant to wish to be. People think that ANY kind of capital immediately means you have a ton of money, and also that having a ton of money means you are actually consistently rich or even in the owning class. This is what happens when you have a lot of people who have justified anger at the rich, but have ZERO actual framework for understanding how capitalism as an economic system and as an ideology works. And this is always how stuff like antisemitism has then gotten popular, because people are more interested in blaming their problems on a fantasy version of "rich people" that draws on preconceived biases against marginalized groups, rather than the ACTUAL wealthy elites.