Luxury belief

A luxury belief is a term used to illustrate an idea or opinion that confers status on members of the upper class at little cost, while inflicting costs on persons in lower classes. The term is often applied to privileged individuals who are seen as disconnected from the lived experiences of impoverished and marginalized people. Such individuals supposedly hold political and social beliefs that signal their elite status; these beliefs are putatively for the benefit of the marginalized but are alleged to have negative impacts on them. Exactly what counts as a luxury belief is not always consistent and may vary from person to person, and the term in general is considered to be controversial.

Origin

The term is a neologism coined by social commentator Rob Henderson in 2019. It describes what some allege is a modern trend among mainly affluent Americans to use their beliefs as a way to display their social status. However, recognition of the phenomenon in sociology predates the term itself. In his video opinion piece for the New York Times Rob Henderson defines luxury beliefs as "ideas held by privileged people that make them look good but actually harm the marginalized." He compares luxury beliefs with virtue signaling and cites defund the police as a "classic luxury belief" along with his other examples of decriminalizing drugs, getting rid of the SAT, and rejecting marriage.

Details

Doug Lemov and co-authors in 2023 described Henderson's concept of the luxury belief as "an idea that confers social status on people who hold it but injures others in its practical consequences". Matthew Goodwin, professor of political science at the University of Kent, further argued in 2023 that such beliefs are held by people "who no longer measure somebody's status or moral worth through money, estates, titles or education but through the new lens of ideas and beliefs."

Some have argued that the belief that marriage and the nuclear family are no better than alternative family arrangements is often cited as a luxury belief, despite there being evidence that family instability (which is equated to non-nuclear families, according to at least some who argue for in favor of the term) is associated with poorer outcomes for children. Holding such beliefs, according to proponents of the concept, is deemed fashionable for elites but the actual effects on those involved, such as children experiencing family instability, are harmful. Henderson notes that outcomes such as rates of incarceration, college degree attainment, and substance abuse are more strongly correlated with children living with both biological parents than with poverty: poor outcomes are more likely for children without both parents, and especially for foster children, than for children in poverty but with both parents.

Criticism

A 2024 University College Dublin working paper used a signaling game to measure if ideology is used by individuals to signal their high status. The study concluded that, while luxury beliefs are associated with left-wing political views, there was no evidence that individuals are using them to signal. Instead, luxury beliefs appeared only to signal college attendance.

In January 2024, The New York Times published a piece by opinion writer Jessica Grose, where she voiced skepticism on the concept of luxury beliefs and their impact despite commonly being associated with the elites. Her critique centered on an instance where Henderson mentions a Yale classmate who denigrated monogamy and marriage despite coming from a stable two-parent family and intending to continue those practices. Grose pointed out that despite arguments suggesting that beliefs held by elite college students could have outsized influence since they disproportionately lead the country, she has yet to hear of any prominent political figure or corporate leader state that marriage is irrelevant. Throughout the article, Grose highlights different confounding factors that could explain declining views of marriage. She concludes by stating:

"It's easy to point the finger at elites, cherry-pick their statements and stir a moral panic about the decline in the marriage rate over time. It's harder to meaningfully expand the safety net so that fewer children live in poverty — which really should be the focus of all this — even if their parents don't get hitched".

References by politicians

In October 2023, former British Home Secretary Suella Braverman claimed in a speech that support for illegal migration, net zero, and habitual criminals are luxury beliefs.

See also

• Baizuo
• Bobo (socio-economic group)
• Champagne socialist
• Conspicuous consumption
• Limousine liberal
• Luxury goods
• Millennial socialism
• Radical chic
• Social justice warrior
• Virtue signalling