(Thread IKs:
dead gay comedy forums)
|
when publications talk about "early retirement" they are talking about joining the ranks of the bourgeoisie. it is the dream of many, many people to make or find or steal enough money to stop working, that is joining the bourgeoisie. the people who win the lottery and lose it all within five years and are back working at the call center are the most proletarian motherfuckers on earth.
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 02:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 09:11 |
|
|
Not a troll question but what if there were say a farmer who was effectively both self employed and sole employee of himself, is that a worker
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 02:08
|
|
|
genericnick posted:Not 100% on this. Are NYT oped writers really payed for their labor or is the relationship more akin to a minor second cousin of the house of Winsor getting a stipend? In Training posted:well nepotism of that kind would mean the labor was basically unnecessary, since they presumably already have passive income in the form of family wealth & investments. so they act as a willing mouthpiece for the ruling class instead of becoming a class traitor and giving me $10,000,000 to establish the US Marxist Class Analysis Institute they are participating in the process of furnishing the cultural conditions of existence of the capitalist class. in general they are the recipients of already appropriated surplus value.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 02:15
|
|
|
401ks and retirement savings plans are lovely neoliberalized pensions forced on the working class, not entrepreneurial maneuvers
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 02:15
|
|
|
Brain Candy posted:right what are you though if you currently must work but will be able to retire and live off of financial instruments that are designed to self-destruct? it's like if people have bourgeois eggs inside of them that hatch and make them move to florida Is a modest 401k 'owned' by a former-now-retired 64 year old factory worker, which they must draw from slowly to not die and may still end up losing if they get really sick, actually Capital?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 02:16
|
|
|
Stinky Wizzleteats posted:Not a troll question but what if there were say a farmer who was effectively both self employed and sole employee of himself, is that a worker do they own over 8 acres? current day that's pretty close to the original petite bourgeosie definition of semi-independent work with the capability to hire workers (means doesn't really matter if the capacity is there). reading mao's analysis of the classes of chinese society is kind of useful because he goes through the logic of defining them and you'll find that the categories don't at all fit the US but made sense at the time/place they were done. for example, petty bourgeosie there includes primary and secondary school teachers, which would absolutely not be the case for modern us. https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-1/mswv1_1.htm
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 02:24
|
|
|
that is exactly what I would like to read, thank you
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 02:27
|
|
|
Stinky Wizzleteats posted:that is exactly what I would like to read, thank you https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1906/11/14.htm the class struggle by stalin (1906) is also good as you can see him going through the same though process.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 02:29
|
|
|
Stinky Wizzleteats posted:Not a troll question but what if there were say a farmer who was effectively both self employed and sole employee of himself, is that a worker someone who farms land they own and sells the produce and thats how they make their living, they're part of the petit bourgeoisie. the petit part is an important distinction from the bourgeoisie proper (moyenne, etc.) because while they own their own means of production (the land), they still have to perform the labor themselves. if this farmer were to then hire more hands to assist, but they still worked themselves as well because they have to, they remain petit bourgeoisie because the labor itself is the pivot upon which the relationship turns. when the farmer is free to stop working because the farm is now productive enough to support replacing them, they have become bourgeoisie. the day your passive income (profit from property ownership) accumulates to the point where you no longer need to labor to sustainably reproduce your own lifestyle for the foreseeable future is your first day as the bourgeoisie. a proletarian or peasant can participate in bourgeois social relations such as market investments and real estate speculation but they're still going to be back on someone else's job site tomorrow if they want to eat.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 02:33
|
|
|
croup coughfield posted:if you're the scion of a wealthy family but they aren't and more importantly won't pay your bills so you have to work to survive, you are working class. if there's also a fat trust waiting for you when you turn 35 or complete a brewsters millions type quest youre still working class now but are upwardly mobile. Pedantry: Angels on a pinhead was a question of mass vs masslessness, a finite vs an infinite number (not “half a dozen of one,” or a frivolous exercise) (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 02:36
|
|
) in the system. I think the question is ultimately just counting angels on the head of a pin. while yes you used money to buy commodities (investment vehicles) with the specific intent of selling them later for money (which is the bourgeois relation to commodity production), working class people do that all the time in other contexts and the purpose is always to later use that money to buy more commodities for their own consumption. for the bourgeoisie, their end goal is the money itself, not what you can buy with it.
|
Sunny Side Up posted:Pedantry: Angels on a pinhead was a question of mass vs masslessness, a finite vs an infinite number (not “half a dozen of one,” or a frivolous exercise) Marxism thread ftw
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 02:48
|
|
|
i picked up blackshirts and reds recently, heard nothing but high high praise. Looking forward to it
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 02:49
|
|
|
croup coughfield posted:when publications talk about "early retirement" they are talking about joining the ranks of the bourgeoisie. it is the dream of many, many people to make or find or steal enough money to stop working, that is joining the bourgeoisie. the people who win the lottery and lose it all within five years and are back working at the call center are the most proletarian motherfuckers on earth. yep, so what does this make people who are certain to hatch into bourgeois? to be such a creature means your current self is at war with your future self. i don't think it's angelogy to examine this, it has explanitory power for the historical failure of socialism in the west Ranter posted:Is a modest 401k 'owned' by a former-now-retired 64 year old factory worker, which they must draw from slowly to not die and may still end up losing if they get really sick, actually Capital? in some ways they are the most bourgeois because any disruption can be mortal. property taxes must be lower, schools & meals must be cut. hands off the medicare, don't get the government involved
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 02:57
|
|
|
Brain Candy posted:yep, so what does this make people who are certain to hatch into bourgeois? to be such a creature means your current self is at war with your future self. i don't think it's angelogy to examine this, it has explanitory power for the historical failure of socialism in the west class struggle isnt individualized like that, and even if it were, the number of people described is vanishingly small. its irrelevant.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 03:07
|
|
|
I mean, if class is about relations then it's probably more helpful to describe how someone's participation in the economy represents certain class interests, and I don't see why someone can't be representing multiple interests at different times (or simultaneously?). That's probably more helpful than trying to determine what singular class a person "belongs" to.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 03:12
|
|
|
croup coughfield posted:class struggle isnt individualized like that, and even if it were, the number of people described is vanishingly small. its irrelevant. nope! Mechafunkzilla posted:I mean, if class is about relations then it's probably more helpful to describe how someone's participation in the economy represents certain class interests, and I don't see why someone can't be representing multiple interests at different times (or simultaneously?). That's probably more helpful than trying to determine what singular class a person "belongs" to. this is the nature of classification. classes in general, and in the framing we're talking about in particular, are models for human brains, there will always be people and things that don't quite fit. the question is whether they suitably meet the human ends you're attempting
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 03:57
|
|
|
also not a troll post: what if the self employed sole employee is a sex worker or equal work/profit partnership agreement between a small party, are they petit bourgeoisie or are they lumpy I ask because I encountered the tones of this in the wild and it would be good to be better informed if I ever go back. Sex workers are of course, oddly not popular with either Lenin or Mao unless I have been serverly misled.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 03:59
|
|
|
the stick in the west was and is censorship, unemployment, imprisonment and murder, but the carrot was the labor of the third world and the labor of future generations, and a failure to understand both is a failure to understand the present
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 04:03
|
|
|
Mechafunkzilla posted:I mean, if class is about relations then it's probably more helpful to describe how someone's participation in the economy represents certain class interests, and I don't see why someone can't be representing multiple interests at different times (or simultaneously?). That's probably more helpful than trying to determine what singular class a person "belongs" to. i disagree. one's relation to labor is the very essence of class struggle. you either need to work to live or you don't. the distance at which one stands from that line on either side is irrelevant. the side of the line you're on determines your class interests at that time. if your position changes, your interests change. im sure individuals can be sympathetic all around but that doesnt change the nature of class struggle. one group is the exploiter and the other the exploited.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 04:05
|
|
|
Stinky Wizzleteats posted:also not a troll post: what if the self employed sole employee is a sex worker or equal work/profit partnership agreement between a small party, are they petit bourgeoisie or are they lumpy if its inside the formal economy (sex work is legalized in that jurisdiction), it's a petit bourgeois relation (even a worker's co-op is petit bourgeois under strict definition). if it's illegal, it's a lumpenproletarian relation.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 04:09
|
|
|
Is artisan production a separate kinda thing here
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 04:09
|
|
|
what if you also fund a revolution with your ill gotten lumpy money, since the formalized government that forbids sex work should be burnt
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 04:10
|
|
|
im afraid not
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 04:10
|
|
|
Stinky Wizzleteats posted:what if you also fund a revolution with your ill gotten lumpy money then you're a lumpenproletarian throwing in your lot with the revolution.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 04:11
|
|
|
Was Stalin a lump
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 04:14
|
|
|
Stinky Wizzleteats posted:what if you also fund a revolution with your ill gotten lumpy money, since the formalized government that forbids sex work should be burnt anyone can be a class traitor. it's a revolutionary science, the goal is to figure out where people are most likely to point guns
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 04:15
|
|
|
Stinky Wizzleteats posted:Was Stalin a lump sometimes!
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 04:15
|
|
|
hell yeah
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 04:16
|
|
|
Brain Candy posted:anyone can be a class traitor. it's a revolutionary science, the goal is to figure out where people are most likely to point guns I also feel this is important to keep in mind: it's not about assigning moral blame so much as figuring out which way you're likely to fall when the chips are down
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 04:16
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:I also feel this is important to keep in mind: it's not about assigning moral blame so much as figuring out which way you're likely to fall when the chips are down #1 mistake people make during these conversations imo. politics isnt about whos a good person!
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 04:20
|
|
|
Stinky Wizzleteats posted:hell yeah his early contributions to the revolution were largely via organized crime
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 04:22
|
|
|
I know, its when he peaked imo
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 04:24
|
|
|
anyone with questions about lumpen in America, potential definitions, role, etc should read some Huey Newton (and other Black Panthers) https://www.marxists.org/archive/newton/index.htm doesn't have a ton. i think for a lot of his stuff you'd still need to get it off libgen or z library https://www.marxists.org/history/usa/workers/black-panthers/ too Cuttlefush has issued a correction as of 04:27 on May 2, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 04:25
|
|
|
Stinky Wizzleteats posted:I know, its when he peaked imo i dunno. its good but the electrification of russia was pretty good too
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 04:28
|
|
|
Stinky Wizzleteats posted:also not a troll post: what if the self employed sole employee is a sex worker or equal work/profit partnership agreement between a small party, are they petit bourgeoisie or are they lumpy Most analyses that I know of argue that property is the differentiator of what you are getting at here. Like, regardless of activity, the basic tenet of what petit-bourgeois means is: people who are propertied but that property is inconsequential compared to the actual bourgeoisie (which is also why their position is precarious too). It's the "small business owner" of myth compared to a real-deal capitalist. They have some degree of getting surplus value, but it's insufficient in providing them with the means to never worry about working again, for example. Likewise, their position is vulnerable to cyclic changes: an actual capitalist may lose a ridiculous amount of money in a crisis but not be affected at all in their standard of living, while the petit-bourgeois might lose their business and get crushed by debt, joining the proletariat. So, in the example you are giving, that person could be considered petit-bourgeois if they have managed to accumulate a reserve of capital large enough that, if applied into investment (for example), provides them with a buffer that most people do not have. They have a greater degree of autonomy, can actually choose which days to work and what clients to attend, etc. However, they still have to work, one way or another. And about being lumpenproletariat, personally I think that term aged poorly and has been misused so much to the point of becoming semantic mush, especially in our day and age
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 04:29
|
|
|
it sounds like a cool thing to call an rear end in a top hat for sure
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 04:37
|
|
|
Ranter posted:Is a modest 401k 'owned' by a former-now-retired 64 year old factory worker, which they must draw from slowly to not die and may still end up losing if they get really sick, actually Capital? in retirement, the worker you describe is not participating in the fundamental capitalist process of appropriating surplus value on account of the 401k alone. they are the recipients of appropriated surplus value as part of a process that's necessary to the fundamental process (money lended to or invested in production). they have little choice where (what type of fund or stocks) the money is invested. they have no say in the working of the companies where their funds are invested (if they did, say as board members, they would be involved directly). does this mean they aren't capitalists? they're not industrial capitalists. as interest receivers, though, they're more like the money-lending capitalist which is not first receiver of the surplus value.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 04:50
|
|
|
Mechafunkzilla posted:I mean, if class is about relations then it's probably more helpful to describe how someone's participation in the economy represents certain class interests, and I don't see why someone can't be representing multiple interests at different times (or simultaneously?). That's probably more helpful than trying to determine what singular class a person "belongs" to. they absolutely can occupy multiple class positions. Capital I posted:To prevent possible misunderstanding, a word. I paint the capitalist and the landlord in no sense couleur de rose [i.e., seen through rose-tinted glasses]. But here individuals are dealt with only in so far as they are the personifications of economic categories, embodiments of particular class-relations and class-interests. My standpoint, from which the evolution of the economic formation of society is viewed as a process of natural history, can less than any other make the individual responsible for relations whose creature he socially remains, however much he may subjectively raise himself above them.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 05:05
|
|
|
Stinky Wizzleteats posted:Not a troll question but what if there were say a farmer who was effectively both self employed and sole employee of himself, is that a worker croup coughfield posted:someone who farms land they own and sells the produce and thats how they make their living, they're part of the petit bourgeoisie. the petit part is an important distinction from the bourgeoisie proper (moyenne, etc.) because while they own their own means of production (the land), they still have to perform the labor themselves. if this farmer were to then hire more hands to assist, but they still worked themselves as well because they have to, they remain petit bourgeoisie because the labor itself is the pivot upon which the relationship turns. when the farmer is free to stop working because the farm is now productive enough to support replacing them, they have become bourgeoisie. i think that, given that he employs no one and just works his little plot, the farmer here is a worker but not a proletarian
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 05:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 09:11 |
|
|
Speaking of class analysis, does anyone have strong opinions on Divided World, Divided Class by Zak Cope?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 11:16
|
|