Can proletarians truly exist in today's first-world nations with social security programs (mostly the EU member nations)? And if so, what percentage of the population do they make up there? Obviously if everyone suddenly stopped working and relied on unemployment benefits the bourgeois state would find a way to force them to work
again, existing unemployed are also already heckled.
But today as it stands even if you have no other reason not to work than simply not wanting to, your survival, your life, your weal and woe are never under threat in the nations this question is concerned with. Thoughts?
244 posts and 37 image replies omitted.401k is finance imperialism, probably
https://www.top1000funds.com/2024/07/profiting-from-war-europes-pension-funds-mull-investing-in-defence/>>2427506>All first-world countries have proletarians, including Israel, for the identitarians here who romanticize the proletariat as something moral.Marxism is about praxis, not mere analysis. A less academic definition might see the proletariat "identity" as the subset of workers who recognize their own collective power to push history forward and enact their own dictatorship. Liberals have false consciousness and reject proletarian morality. Liberals want to be kulak landlords
>>2427601<"Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat, but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires"how's it going?
>>2427606>Workers in the west have evolved into an obstacle to revolutionThey want passive income, they want to feast on old people's retirement savings by doing bitcoin Wall Street bullshit. They said "Elon Musk is a man of the people!" for a reason lol
>and the development of productive forcesThey do the opposite, look at how they use AI and other 'innovations' that are like stripping the copper (and human resources lol) out of their infrastructure to sell for their private profits. Americans can't even tell if a tornado is coming by
>>2429552umm umm
shits pants and criesyou're fucking MAD you stupid LEFTOID
ummmmm
digs shit out of pants and throws at wall to see what sticksFUCKING you don't know ANYTHING do you, ummmmm
pisses and cries everyhwere and begins swimming in itunder REAL PROLETARIAN COMMUNSIM imperialist first worlders like you will be SHOT
collects paycheck from FBI real proletarian mass line is to DISAGREE WITH YOU!!!
brain swells to size of hot air balloon, begins levitating away and echoing increasinglyAND BESIDES!!!! under communism you will still have proletarian kings, proletarian CEOs, and proletarian father figures of proletarian nuclear families engaged in proletarian mentorship of proletarian novices in a proletarian guild system which exists for proletarian competence
>>2429531> A less academic definition might see the proletariat "identity" as the subset of workers who recognize their own collective power to push history forward and enact their own dictatorship.< Establish new definition nobody has agreed on, not even motivating it> Liberals have false consciousness and reject proletarian morality. Liberals want to be kulak landlords< Accuse everyone else of being a liberalSlime behaviour
> They want passive income, they want to feast on old people's retirement savings by doing bitcoin Wall Street bullshit. They said "Elon Musk is a man of the people!" for a reason lol> They do the opposite, look at how they use AI and other 'innovations' that are like stripping the copper (and human resources lol) out of their infrastructure to sell for their private profits.This is bile dogshit btw: a class is primarely identified with their relation to the means lf production.
Did the pesants stop being such when they supported the king against the french revolutionaries? Dis the pesants become something else when they revolted against the emperor in china and the feudal lords in europe? No, it did not, because the current position of a group of people in regards to this or that policy because of their
subjective interests of the moment has nothing to do with where they
objective interests live.
To say otherwise rejects a material understanding of how society works
>>2429579 (me)
Re: did Marx stop calling them workers when the luddite masses tried to destroy the machineries that capital used against them? No
>>2429658Sure Anon, I'm sure
this time the third world national bougie government won't sell out and become compradors in 15 years. I mean when has anything like that ever happened before?
>>2429658That's not communism at all anon that's just further development of capitalism
This is even so in modern capitalist societies because you can't just modernize through sheer political will. You need foreign investments to create machine tools and industrial commons, and to get foreign investments you need to intensify rate of exploitation inside your country. Therefore building a sweatshop is ideologically communist, because using that you can get Capital which you then can invest in hard industries and would in the long run reduce dependency between the periphery and the core. Therefore, building a sweatshop is ideologically communistic.
Do you understand how perverse this developmental, Stageist talk is
Unique IPs: 25