# Luxury belief

A luxury belief is a term used to describe "ideas or opinions that confer status on the upper class at very little cost, while often inflicting costs on the lower classes." The term is often applied to privileged individuals who are seen as disconnected from the lived experiences of working class, impoverished, or 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 a luxury belief, since there is evidence that family instability (which is equated to non-nuclear families, according to at least some who argue 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.

## Research and commentary

A 2024 University College Dublin working paper used a signaling game to try to ascertain whether or not ideology is used by individuals to signal their high status in an anonymous online context. The study was unable (due to insufficient power and weak effects) to determine whether individuals used luxury beliefs or their opposite to signal to an anonymous respondent with whom they were partnered. On the other hand respondents believed that those who espoused many of the luxury beliefs tested were more likely to be attending college (one of the indicators of social status used in the study). Respondents who declared beliefs associated with white privilege and critical race theory were indeed more likely to possess a college degree as well as to consider themselves left-wing.
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".
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.