/labor/ - Labor

Everyone who has a bullshit job

Jobs are basically welfare programs if you really think about it.

exactly the same as 200 years ago, immiserated wage workers with who have nothing - no property, no considerable reserves - to sell but their own labor, what else would it be?

>>1889
pseuds love to eat up bullshit books (see what i did there?) like this or varoufakis man

>>1878
Anyone who trades their labor for a wage.

>>1891
What is a considerable reserve? Does this mean any job with a pension or a 401k makes you petit bourgeois?

>>1893
you want a number? the working class is just those who lack/cant accrue economic reserves and are at the total mercy of the labor market, earning pittances just to survive and work the next day, keeping them dependent solely on the demand for labor for survival. now connect the dots yourself

revolution literally arises out of the necessity of the proletariat. their position in society makes them inherently revolutionary, because their interests are in direct opposition to the system and theyre in a position to actually affect things when united. thats why communism is the movement of the proletariat, not of any other class, retard

people here really need to understand the difference between a class in itself and a class for itself

>>1894
Capitalism figured out how to ameliorate class conflict, it’s not the 19th century anymore. Just as feudalism did debt jubilees, big feasts, honeymoons, bread and circus, capitalism has welfare, public services, millions of hours of entertainment and drugs to drown yourself in, and the faint possibility of becoming petit bourgeois.

>>1894
The people you’re describing don’t exist in advanced capitalist liberal democracies.

Of all the political dead ends of modern radicals, the belief that there can be a revolution that does not have the proletariat at its base is the most impotent and reveals the lack of understanding of revolution common among contemporary radicals. The proletariat is not the necessary emphasis of revolutionary politics because they are already disillusioned or the most oppressed. It is because of their position in the production of the social order.

>>1892
So executives, managers, cops, politicians… Need I say more?

It's wrongheaded to reduce class to simple list of formal criteria, but at least think it through. What use is your definition? Class is about shared interests resulting from shared conditions of life. What exactly do a CEO and a factory worker have in common?

>>1896
nta, but what advanced liberal country are you living in where rent and cost of living is affordable and allows you to save money? can you tell me so i can move there

>>1897
Executives do not primarily make their money from wages they make it from stock; ownership shares in the company. Most execs are petit boug or boug.

Politicians make most of their money from bribes and insider trading.

Managers and cops are workers but they're also class traitors.

>>1897
Name a single proletarian revolution, you can’t because they literally all happened in semi feudal semi colonial countries

>>1897
>executives
usually also get stock ownership and other fringe benefits.
>managers
most of them, yes. "manager" sounds bad, but illustratively: a supermarket "manager" in britain makes very little more than the workers they manage.
>cops
yes
>politicians
no, but they're a very special case: as well as the ability to sell access they wind up with a range of fringe benefits and are usually subsidized to hire staff of their own. on top of this, their conditions of employment are unusual: basically impossible to fire for 3-5 years, then completely random whether they keep their job or not, then another 3-5 years of total security if they do.

if you want to talk shared interests and shared conditions of life your citation of factory workers is inapt in most developed countries: they are now fairly rare figures who often earn much more than the average prole. if you're a factory worker in britain today, odds are you're getting £60k+/yr to put together high-performance jet engines or ejector seats for Israeli F-35s, not £24k/yr to screw together dinky toys.

>>1878
Anyone who would starve and go homeless if they stopped selling their labor (barring the aid of charity or government).

>>1878
The prole has his labor-power reduced to a commodity. It's not about empiricism. It's about how the subsistence of the prole is bought and sold on the market.