Classism is commonly used to describe a relationship of oppression based on devaluation, exclusion and marginalization along class lines. Accordingly, classism is directed against low-income, unemployed or homeless people or against working-class children and has an impact on life expectancy, limits access to housing, educational qualifications, healthcare, power, participation, recognition and money. Social participation is based on various factors - fashion, or access to it, is an essential feature of social participation and can just as easily be reversed or have an exclusionary effect. This is not necessarily because one cannot read fashion codes, but rather because one cannot afford them. Whereas in the 1980s and 1990s, clothing and fashion from discounters (which had a stigmatizing momentum) had the connotation of excluding/stigmatizing and was bought by people who had to invest as little money as possible in clothing - discounters are now reappropriating their former “poor” image (which they tried to shed with major advertising campaigns over many years). The previously stigmatizing discounter style is now being revived for a mostly youthful and affluent target group, who gladly accept the “down-dressing” and slip on the Lidl shirt without complaint. Where otherwise oversized designer labels are emblazoned, the Lidl or Aldi logo now shines on the chest and exudes the charm of the proletariat. Promoted and fueled by the marketing strategies of brands such as Vetements and Balenciaga, which appropriate “workwear” as “streetwear” through collaborations such as with the logistics company DHL, “anti-fashion” has become a style. It allows its wearers a brief flirtation with the world of the “proletariat”, a coquetry with the “working class” that one allows oneself if one has either left it behind or has never been part of it.