I’ll start with some definitions to clear things up for you then.
monolith
/ˈmɒnəlɪθ/
a large, impersonal political, corporate, or social structure regarded as indivisible and slow to change.
underclass
/ˈʌndəklɑːs/
the lowest social stratum in a country or community, consisting of the poor and unemployed.
When you talk about ‘the underclass’ as if they’re a single bloc of people who deliberately reject society and harm their neighbours, that is treating them as a monolith.
“Underclass” is a loaded term used to describe people who are economically disadvantaged and socially marginalised, usually with the implication that they are permanently outside of mainstream society. It’s not a neutral description, its very much rooted in classism and often used to dehumanise or blame people for systemic issues like poverty, lack of education, unemployment etc. You can’t change the definition to suit your argument and pretend it’s not just classism.
The way you’re using is actually worse as it suggests a group of people who are inherently immoral or antisocial, which is not only offensive but also wildly inaccurate.
And no—I’m not proud to associate with people who harm others. I’m proud to empathise with people who are constantly stereotyped, dehumanised, and treated as problems rather than people. There’s a huge difference between excusing antisocial behaviour (actual antisocial behaviour, not children playing) and refusing to tar entire communities with the same brush.
And let’s not forget: this entire thing started because of children playing in their own garden. You’ve taken that and leapt to ranting about the supposed moral decay of the lower classes. I live in a lovely, quiet area and my neighbours’ kids are loud, boisterous boys who kick footballs and spray water over the hedge all summer. I don’t have a stick up my bottom, so I don’t consider it a personal attack.