Gervase, Marx's and Engels' principles of defining class in terms of social relations to the means of production are just as valid today, but I agree equating class in this Marxian sense and cultural behaviour, as many are talking about here, is no longer tenable. However, it is not irrelevant because Marxian class does still explain why some people have lots of income and some don't have any, and what's more cultural behaviour is still built upon the economic basis of society, and, yes, that is different in some ways from when Marx and Engels described it. But most Marxists are interested in the principles of historical materialism and class struggle rather than
expecting capitalists to still wear tophats. I believe that your observations cultural behaviour of capitalists is reflected from the gradual domination of capital over the last vestiges of hereditary wealth and privilege that have been dissappearing since before Marx's time, rather than any pseudo-biological 'English' trait. However, capitalism breeds inseurity, even for the capitalist, so you might be correct in some sense, hence why we still have people who believe in the supernatural goings on and other such mumbo-jumbo - illusions that people create to make life a bit more bearable.

I really can't see where you are coming from with the They are so marginalised as to be almost outside the traditional capital/labour equation. comment. Capital is used to buy labour and materials and the goods or services resulting from that labour are sold, peasants or artisans might get out of the capitalist scheme but I don't see how workers can.