(no subject)
"Hipsters", as a cultural entity, can be deconstructed using a bastardized version of Hegel's expanded concept of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. Hipsters result as the obvious synthesis in the process, wherein the thesis and the antithesis together form a distinct third concept in unity.
(Note: The concept as detailed in Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit depends on certain abstracts, concretes, concepts of negation, and a progression of such. I'm ignoring this for what's a rough cultural comparison, hence the "bastardized version".)
The thesis of Hipsterism can be traced first to the various subcultures from which they crib bits and pieces to form the aggregate of their aesthetics, tastes, and lifestyle affectations. Most of these are post-Reagan era subcultures: the post-punk scene and especially the DIY trends thereof, modern anarchists, collectivists, environmentalists, anti-consumerist thought/culturejamming, and other such socially-concious political trends as well as a certain post-modernism of society by large.
Outside of subcultures, there's a certain fetishization of poverty and the aesthetic of such with a large focus on 70's and 80's mores that have carried over (Pabst Blue Ribbon, western shirts and flannel, and occasionally an ironic taste for trucks and buicks). This fetishization of poverty can combine with the more traditional bohemian image many middle-class artists give themselves, or exist in and of itself as an artless bohemianism. This is often accompanied with a certain appropriation of other cultures. These appropriations and affectations, combined with the works of the forementioned subcultures, together consist of the thesis of this progression.
The antithesis exists, obviously, as the reactive trends to the forementioned subcultures, as well as the other side of social duality. Clinton-era neo-liberalism, consumerist enthusiasm, the middle class euphoria of baby boomers during the bubble of the 90's and the post-yuppie pragmatism form the bulk of the feel. The antithesis is also distinctly composed of both the middle and upper classes, which by definition alone stand in stark contrast to the aspect of poverty in the thesis, although not always in direct opposition.
This cultural conflict between thesis and antithesis, the sub- and counter-culture versus the overwhelming norms of a boom-era middle class came together in a particular way to form the synthesis that is Hipsterism. The demographic for this is by large the children and occasionally grandchildren of those middle class, post-yuppie baby boomers.
The immediate view of Hipsterism is that it's entirely appropriative. The greater majority of individuals within it have no place within the counter-cultures proper from which they crib. They are by large white, middle class or wealthier, and yet still emulate the poor and/or minority ethnic groups. They still appreciate the aspects of such, but have little of an authentic stake or appreciation, and in their appreciation either affect a heavy air of irony, or a certain derivative greed. This is not to say there cannot be borrowing from other cultures/trends without being properly acknowledgable or appreciative (a great example of this is "hipster" music, like Vampire Weekend whom are enthusiastically fond of the afrobeat roots they incorporate into their work). Rather, Hipsterism as is commonly derided possesses those attributes of flippancy.
In this appropriation, the thesis meets the antithesis, where such authentic movements are taken into the guise of the wealthy classes and the majority view. Some subversion remains, but it is by large 'acceptable' and hardly socially moving, instead being the understood id of an idle class. The stereotypical image of a Hipster with a trust fund, of being a gentrifying agent, of by large appropriating those sub-cultural trends and turning them into commodities is begat entirely by their class background. Additionally, traditional agents of the antithesis can be seen as taking advantage of such. The CEO of Urban Outfitters, a neo-conservative capitalist who has supported cantidates such as Rick Santorum, sells apparrel and items so-derived from the established thesis, while being a noted member of the antithesis. He himself professes to have been a "liberal" in his youth, but by the standard American definition of liberal, that distances him little from the neoliberalism of the antithesis.
Hegel proposed though that the end of these chains always result in the synthesis reaching their "measure", and dissolving into a new thesis. This is far more evidenced within his progression of abstract to concrete, but within cultural mores it's harder to apply since the thesis never stopped and the antithesis exists as well. Rather, I think that there's a certain dynamic of influence between the three within certain aspects of society, where disaffectation and disinterest in the irony of Hipsterism following the bulk of this current depression period might lead to more authentic movements. This is though, of course, unbased speculation. One must hope though, because I am, like everyone else, so fucking tired of hipsters. Seriously guys, fucking stop it.