[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internet about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password(For file deletion.)

Not reporting is bourgeois


File: 1746839465236.png (80.04 KB, 640x722, 1746771473102.png)

 

I'm sick of the colloquial use of "petty-bourgeois" in relation to some idpol "issue".
Social progressivism isn't bourgeois, college professors are labor aristocrats, the middle class isn't a Marxist term, income doesn't have a causal link to class, social conservatism's only role is that of division of the proletariat, you can't become another class than the one your relationship to the means of production dictate, class interests are not subject to change and they will always be the most important political issue as long as capitalism exists.
I'm willing to die on that hill and anyone who uses identity politics to incorrectly attribute class is no Marxist.

>>2261702
Excellent text, however that image does not show the petite-bourgeoisie's ambition to grow nor portray the tendency to swerve towards fascism. The petite-bourgeoisie can be variable, but must always be looked at from the worse side to avoid trouble or a compromise with principles.

but le gays don't have le kids so they can le save even when making le subsistence wages therefore they can accumulate capital and therefore they can buy means of production and therefore they are le bourgeois…. anyways BIRTH STRIKE NOW!!!!!!

>>2261702
>class interests are not subject to change
maybe but the workers have some cataclysmically bad false consciousness

File: 1746840281700.png (256.31 KB, 640x722, edit.png)

>>2261710
To show the variable nature of the petite-bourgeoisie I have added a two sided arrow with the text "Tendency Towards" the bourgeoisie (aspirations of growth and defend the bourgeoisie in times of crisis) with a few broken lines towards proletariat in the case that they give up their status and accumulated wealth and instead cater and devote towards the proletariat entirely (ceasing to be petite-bourgeoisie).

based and correct OP

based and correct

>>2261702
What's the overlap between homeowners and landlords?

>>2262792
Not my graphic, but it's fairly straight forward.
First off a significant populace straight up own their home, live in it and do nothing else with it. That also implies it's fully paid off, otherwise the bank owns it. These people are mostly proles, some petty-bourg.
That's the "small overlap" (between the proletariat and land owners, not landlords)
There's technically edge cases where people own multiple homes, live in one, rent the others and still get the majority of their income by selling their ability to work making them proles, but that's in such an insignificant number so it's irrelevant for Marxist economics and I assume the graphic.

>>2261702
wtf is this garbage. class analysis isn't something that can be compressed into a shitty infograph and it is significantly more complex and localized than the 5 things enumerated there. india doesn't have the same classes and composition as china, germany doesn't have the same situation as the united states. this is what happens when you are more concerned about the internet than about actually observing and understanding your environment. you are not even citing sources

I'm ashamed by the fact that this nonsense is allowed on the main board

So cool to see OP stomping their feet like a child because communists dare to analyze class in terms of property and reserves instead of some shit lifted straight off some fucking slogan.

>proletarian land-owners
jesus fucking CHRIST


>>2264437
Absolutely

File: 1747001619351.jpg (59.48 KB, 417x465, blank.jpg)

>>2264437
>>2264439
>they aren't a retard like me so they must be the same person
I hate that braindead mouthbreathers infest this shithole.

What distinguishes the proletariat as a class is their severance from the means of production or reserves that can be capitalized, inducing wage slavery.

>>2264443
If you own a house yet still have to work for someone else to pay the bills you're a proletarian

>homeowners are proletarian
>homeowners separate from the middle class
>peasantry for some reason in a chart about capitalism

leftypols finest

>>2264447
your individual choices are irrelevant to class analysis

File: 1747001998491.jpg (143.04 KB, 1125x734, nah.jpg)


>>2264451
Wow one off hand remark by Engels

>>2264453
>owning a house is neither proletarian nor capitalist
Hmm if only there was a name for a class in the middle of proletarians and haute bourgeois.

>>2264455
That's not what petit bourg means

Also home ownership is the norm in many countries are you seriously saying 2/3rds of the population in many places is not proletarian? God that's dumb

>>2264455
>>2264456
>If only there was a word for this
>that's not what this other word means
Ball room dancing again I see.

>>2264460
You are such a retard

>>2264456
not only that but it shows the pointlessness of this imaginary class analysis not based on any particular place or moment. a family that got a house subsidized by the state and isn't allowed to pass it to their children, sell it, rent it, or otherwise speculate with it, will have different interest from the family that owns a house but is paying a mortgage or from the family that owns a house and can do whatever they want with it. they might all be salaried workers but they will have different political positions

>>2261702
I mean some people who talk like this just don't like the modern world and want to RETRN. But it's, like, all that is holy ends up being profaned anyways.

I can be convinced that a lot of the post-war cultural transformation is a lot different than what socialists thought they were fighting for in the 1920s, but often the "anti-idpol" types just chalk it up to some kind of conspiracy rather than trying to work out a material analysis of why this really radical cultural revolution (you might call it) actually did happen. It hasn't affected all parts of the world evenly and there are variations but it can be tracked more or less across the entire modernizing globe.

Really it's just people having more autonomy because of urbanization and improvements in technology (just think about the impact of communications technology) and transportation so people move around a lot more. There has been an increase in purchasing power relative to people living 100 years ago. There are material prerequisites which made big changes in culture possible – which would not have been possible before – and has influenced everything from music to fashion and that is global. And these changes hit modernizing societies very rapidly in historical terms (within a span of a few decades as opposed to centuries where nothing changes) which produces a lot of young people growing up in a very different context from their parents and grandparents, and have no memory or shared experience of what life was like before [insert modern technology here].

Also something can be "bourgeois" and also get appropriated by the working class. Working-class people have at various times taken their styles from high fashion in the upper social strata, working-class girls even more so. It also works the other way with the upper strata trying to LARP as working and class and the spread of American blue jeans as Paris haute couture went into retreat.

marx does actual class analysis in the eighteenth brumaire because he doesn't try to clumsily pigeonhole the different political forces into the stupid, reductionist model from OP's image

>>2261702
>>2264447
If a proletarian revolution happened and the stock and housing market crash, do they have solidarity with the workers or bemoan the devaluation of their reserves? Don't these reserves constitute a stake in bourgeois society that they have to protect? Reason you dimwit.

>>2264522
>If a proletarian revolution happened and the stock and housing market crash, do they have solidarity with the workers or bemoan the devaluation of their reserves?
Solidarity with workers is still in their class interests.
>Don't these reserves constitute a stake in bourgeois society that they have to protect?
Kinda? It also constitutes a resource, which can be useful.
>Reason you dimwit.
You first.


Unique IPs: 15

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]