The last 2,000 years has seen countless civilisations rise and fall; so many and of such complexity it is basically impossible to learn all the lessons they have to teach about prosperity. Gotta spend a lot of time relearning old lessons and reorganising how we expect the thing to run.

This article is to represent the faction of people (not named, I'll call them Quilletians) who think that power and influence resting with small businesses and normal-but-wealthy families (identified as middle class yeomanry) is likely the secret sauce of why English-speaking countries have done so well so far.

The thesis here is that the yeomanry are being opposed by government or oligarchic policy and their perspective is being mitigated by a group of people called the 'clerisy'. The article is demarcating who this clerisy are and aren't so that there is a common language for Quilletians to work out what to think and then do about them.

Basically, it's a long-winded way of dividing the middle class into white-collar and blue-collar and pointing out that blue-collar has taken it in the shorts and is angry.

It's not wrong. But, as always, it projects nothing actionable. What does that blue-collar cohort DO to regain economic well-being?

While Brahmins are "white-collar" pretty much by definition, Vaishyas/yeomanry clearly encompasses both blue-collar and white-collar groups. So I don't think the traditional "blue- vs. white-collar" distinction is quite the same thing as what this article is about.

I think it would be close to how people in the clerisy (well payed employees with a secure job) take less risk and therefore are able to support left wing measures. If the economy as a whole crashes they stand to lose little or nothing at all. Meanwhile, if the "main street shop owners" take similar risks ins similar situations they not only stand to lose their business, but their current and future livelihood. This makes them conservative and against progressive policy.