🗽UNITED STATES POLITICS 🦅<"What if we actually talked about America?" EditionThread for the hellish discussion related to
the scourge of the earth, the destroyer of nations, the king of coups, the sultan of sanctions, the emir of the embargo, the autocrat of austerity, the baron of busting unions, the prince of privatization, the lord of loan sharks, the pharaoh of proxy wars, the Divided $nakkkes of Amerikkka™
🏈 💵 🌭 🍔
🛠️ Strike Tracker ⚒️https://striketracker.ilr.cornell.edu/🇺🇸 Deeds of the Burger Reich 🇺🇸https://github.com/dessalines/essays/blob/main/us_atrocities.md📺 Live News 📺(sponsored by USAID)
• CNN:
https://www.livenewsnow.com/american/cnn-news-usa.html• MSNBC:
https://www.livenewsnow.com/american/msnbc.html• FOX:
https://www.livenewsnow.com/american/fox-news-channel.html• Bloomberg:
https://www.bloomberg.com/live/usPrevious thread:
>>2270505 563 posts and 228 image replies omitted.>>2273881>Why do so many people on the left treat the working class, especially the people who work low-paid wage work, as a sort of noble savage?who. under what circumstance?
>And why have so many people on the left begun to sublimate Protestant work ethic with class solidarity?communists, not 'so many people on the left'. communists 'sublimate' that into class solidarity, and is done so because class solidarity is the response to any complain workers could do.
>You have college-educated media studies types lambasting the working class for being angry at their conditions and disguising this with language that on the surface seems like class solidarity, but in reality is just exploitation propaganda repackaged.Example, pls. Provide some.
>Of course no one wants to work the majority of these shitty jobs.this is a strawman. Everyone likes a job that pays good enough. and all jobs should receive a fair pay, and some shit is too overpaid for no reason.
>The goal is to abolish wage labor, not to moralize it as suffering for class consciousness sake.au contraire, the goal is
From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. a wageless society is idealistic as fuck. who is going to work for you? cockroaches?
>If a worker complains about their job and the exploitative conditions about their job, if a worker goes as far as to say, I'm not going to work this job, I quit, and the communist responds with, we think you're too good for that job, you think you're above the working class, you think you're better than being a worker, that's vulgar class consciousness, that's liberalism in red paint.<we think you're too good for that jobSHIT NEVER SAID>The goal is to destroy the wage labor systemno, it isn't. x2.
>Is to destroy the wage labor systemno it isn't. x3.
>Ask yourself, if communism won today, do you think that we would have Wendy's?what has this question to do with what is above? how are you connecting these questions with this one?
>Do you think that there would be people working for $10 an hour at the drive-thru at Wendy's after we have communism?if $10 is enough for this person to have a house, a car, their needs covered, and their labor surplus isn't stolen, then yes, there would be.
>If the answer is yes, then I think we need to think a little bit fucking bigger.you are confused. read more theory.
>>2274093>of course anarchism is brought in when no wage labor reaches a point where Marx and Engels are proven to never have said or advocated for the elimination of wage labor.Read The Principles of Communism, by Engels.
Specifically see first question.
there's no special condition for the emancipation or liberation of the working class. you achieve it by whatever means, you reached communism.
>>2274088see
>>2274092 and
>>2274097in this
>>2274082 what's stated is the characteristics in which capitalism enforces the exploitative structure it exerts on workers.
by no means they advocated for the end of wage labor, as it's simply put in
The Principles of Communism. You could have a revolutionary society with a communist society with wage labor, as long the working class is emancipated and liberated. what are the conditions and means? the clues are closer to
>From each according to his ability, to each according to his needsthan it is in such an abstract idea.
>>2274125I see you rely on strawmaning as a last resource once you are cornered.
>demsoc liberalismok radlib.
There are about two million fast food workers employed by McDonald's and similar companies in America right now. Think about that for a second–millions of people working long hours, often for poverty wages, in an industry built entirely around speed, convenience, and cheap labor. Now imagine if we nationalized that entire sector. Take every McDonald's, every Burger King, every Wendy's, every Domino's, and put them under public ownership. And then, instead of maintaining this absurd density where four fast food restaurants sit on the same street corner, we drastically reduce the number of locations. Streamline it. Make it centrally managed. What you're left with is a leaner, more intentional network, organized on a local scale–neighborhood, district, city–plugged into a national supply and distribution system.
So we shut down maybe two-thirds of them. That still leaves a massive footprint. Because again, in most places, you'll find multiple fast food chains within a few hundred feet of each other. You don't need four. You don't need three. You need one. Close the rest. Convert that one into a community kitchen. A public canteen. Something different in tone and structure–no longer driven by profit, no longer an assembly line of grease and burnout. You automate some of the tasks. You cut down on unnecessary labor. The remaining workers are paid well. They're not service drones–they're providing socially necessary labor, feeding people in their own neighborhoods. It's dignified, respected work, embedded in a broader project of transitioning towards communism.
Now what do you do with all the people who used to work in the other locations? You don't just throw them away. You take that surplus labor and redirect it toward something productive. Something real. Maybe that means a national climate jobs program. Retraining. Education. Give people the opportunity to learn actual skills–carpentry, plumbing, electrical, agriculture, anything with long-term use value. Not this endless churn of fast food labor, spending your days making minimum wage while dealing with pissed-off customers trapped in consumer hell. Give people tools. Give them time. Let them come back with something that can lift up their community. That's what a workforce program should do. Everyone gets a shot at a life grounded in collective rebuilding, not corporate extraction.
And while we're at it, ask yourself: why do we even need drive-thrus? Why are we designing cities around cars in the first place? Drive-thrus aren't just a feature–they're an expression of capitalist priorities. Fast movement, private consumption, isolated transactions. They're part of the superstructure. That's the problem. People want to cling to the superstructure–car-centric design, private property, franchised consumer spaces–and just slap some socialist vocabulary on top of it. "Socialist service economy." What does that even mean? It's nonsense.
You can't preserve capitalist forms and expect revolutionary outcomes. That's not how this works. The majority of what exists in this country–from zoning laws to labor hierarchies to the layout of highways and parking lots–is a product of the capitalist superstructure. These things aren't neutral. They were built for a reason. They exist to serve capital. And you don't change the system by keeping those structures in place and trying to inject them with new meaning. You dismantle them. You destroy them. Only then can you begin to change the base.
But instead, we get this pseudo-leftist fantasy where we keep all the fast food joints and pretend they're somehow revolutionary now because the workers own a fraction of them, or because they pay fifteen dollars an hour. It's ridiculous. The logic is still capitalist. The form is still capitalist. The whole thing is still designed to extract value and reinforce capital's dominance.
We need to tear the whole thing down. Fast food, drive-thrus, endless sprawl, meaningless labor–it all has to go. That's the point. You can't build something new until you destroy what's holding everything in place.
>>2274142>Marx and Engels explicitly state their opposition to wage labourunder capitalism because it's how functions the exploitative system of capitalism.
show me where they say they are against wage labor by any shape or perform under socialism and communism. go ahead.
>>2274064this isnt the best place to look for therapy :(
stay strong
Unique IPs: 25