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

/meta/ - Ruthless criticism of all that exists (in leftypol.org)

Discussions, querries, feedback and complaints about the site and its administration.
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password(For file deletion.)

Not reporting is bourgeois


File: 1734887180980.png (387.39 KB, 546x438, hologram.png)

 

Hello /leftypol/ users. This is a thread to post ordinances, i.e. ad hoc rules voted on by the modocracy, which are not covered explicitly by the rules in rules.html, though most are arguably applications or clarifications of actions prohibited by the existing rules. Any posts violating these ordinances will be removed, and possibly banned at the mods discretion. This post will be periodically updated to reflect new ordinances, or to remove old ones.

  1. H*z is banned. Any mention of, depiction of, video, audio, or image (including memes) of, or related to, the individual known as Adam Tahir (more commonly known as Haz Al-Din), including associated projects such as the media collective "Infrared", or the US-based "American Communist Party" founded in 2024, etc. are BANNED.
  2. No non O.C. Wojaks, Pepes, or Groypers. Any Wojaks, pepes, groypers, etc. which are not /leftypol/ original content are considered spam.Superseded by rule 15 on 2025-04-20
  3. The Wojakifcation/wojak script is banned. This is a bit of javascript, commonly used on bunkerchan, which takes a post one is replying to and posts a greentext version of it in a pre-made wojak template, which is used as a reaction image.
  4. 'Real Proletarian' rhetoric which implies a large percentage of wage workers are not proletarians is banned - per modocracy vote passed on 2024-12-25
  5. For original posts outside of /siberia/, "coomer bait" images which are sexual, sexualizing, or appeal to the prurient interest in any way are BANNED and will be spoilered or removed. - per modocracy vote passed on 2025-01-02
  6. Evading original post word minimum outside /siberia/ is BANNED. - per modocracy vote passed on 2025-01-02
  7. Incel posts are banned site wide (i.e. incel talking points and making 9999 threads complaining about women, saying all women are bourgeoise/sluts/etc.) - per modocracy vote passed on 2025-01-02
  8. "Feral" furry porn (i.e. drawn or cartoon pornography depicting a character that is a four-legged animal, or to a significant degree non-anthropomorphic) is BANNED, and will be spoilered or removed at the moderator's discretion - per modocracy vote passed on 2025-01-11 Superseded by extension of rule 10 on 2025-02-17
  9. Climate change denial, especially to the extent of excessive doomerism and BP shill tier takes, is banned - per modocracy vote passed on 2025-01-11
149 posts and 18 image replies omitted.

>>40804
Dont listen to him. He thinks bankers and blackwater operatives are proletarians merely because they are paid wages. Doctors are petite-bourgeoisie. Mao explains that lower intellectuals of capitalism are petite-bourgeois in his class analysis of 1926 capitalist China.
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-1/mswv1_1.htm

>>40807
what do wants or stakes have to do with their relation to the means of production?

>>40805
>you cant determine the class character by job title
in most cases bc i dont think theres proletarian neurosurgeons rofl

>>40808
meh mao was a retard , all the things itt are already in marx

>>40809
>what do stakes have to do with their relation to the means of production?
Oh my fucking god, is this what the staff wanted? No wonder discussion has gone completely downhill. Yeah I wonder why people who benefit from capitalism would see it in their self-interest to maintain it!!

>>40810
cuban neurosurgeons sent to venezuela on behalf of the state are secrete bourgeois agents?

>>40812
What in the flying fuck are you even talking about.

>>40812
Venezuela and cuba are socialist States. Doctors are proletarian under Communism, but bourgeois in capitalism. See barefoot doctor program

>>40811
Their self interest also has nothing to do with their relation to the means of production. Its also not in their self interest, its false consciousness, and their perceived self interest is why they are class traitors.

>>40813
most doctors in the world are workers not rich americans whos parents gave them 100k and told them to pick between med and law school

>>40815
>Their self interest also has nothing to do with their relation to the means of production
READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX READ MARX

This is like talking to a fucking wall. Nothing but catchphrases, zero actual analysis.

>>40816
proletarian is defined by its relation to the means of production. they don't own means of production and must sell their labor. the bourgeois own the means of production and don't work. petit-bourgeois own means of production and also work.

thats what marx says. its not complicated.

>>40802
>>you are literally reducing proletariat to some slogan
>im doing the opposite.
Ok, quick review:

>this group is not proletarian because they own property

<but they work for a wage!
>this group is not proletarian because they have reserves
<but they work for a wage! x2
>this group is not proletarian because they have a stake in maintaining capitalism
<but muh relation to production!
>this group is not proletarian because it's not in their self-interest
<self-interest is irrelevant! it's all about "relation to production"!
>this profession on average makes enough money to easily accumulate reserves anywhere in the world so big chances are they are not proletarian
<but they aren't Americans so they ARE proletarians! (?????????)

Seriously?

>>40817
This is like some braindead definition you'd see in some sociology 101 course. So according to you cops, military, managers, even CEOs are proletarians. Fucking incredible. And I'm the one who gets banned for arguing otherwise!

>>40817
So blackwater operatives who invaded iraq were proletarians? Were crackers also proletarians if they didnt own the plantation?

>>40818
>>this group is not proletarian because they own property
i never said that. if they own property and also work they are petite-bourgeois.

>>40819
>>40818
ok what the fuck do you think it means then?
https://www.marxists.org/glossary/terms/p/r.htm#proletariat

>>40817
>thats what marx says. its not complicated.
bro dont act like you ve read any marx at all when he says a lot more than just some basic shit about relation to the means of production. why are you ignoring all the times he talks about reserves , property selfinterest etc, he wrote dozens of pages saying what made the proletariat revolutionary and what did not for you to come here only using some vague sentence as the sole quality to compare any situation to

>>40820
yes.

>>40822
>he wrote dozens of pages saying what made the proletariat revolutionary and what did not
i didn't say they were revolutionary. lots of proles are reactionary and backwards. its probably not worth trying to organize cops and mercenaries because of things like their immediate self-interest but that doesn't make them not proles. if youve got dozens of pages of marx saying that workers aren't proles if they have 'reserves' then post them

>>40821
I feel like I waste my time every time I write an effortpost because I just get dumb one-liners in the replies. Anyway even this reductionist dictionary entry already disagrees with you.

< The proletariat is that class in society which lives entirely from the sale of its labour power and does not draw profit from any kind of capital; whose weal and woe, whose life and death,whose sole existence depends on the demand for labour…


This dependency constitutes their wage as the only source of income that they are in need of for their own reproduction. One who holds savings in assets or even owns a house/real estate meaning property would be taken off the equation as the relation of dependence no longer persists. Even Engels points this out in The Housing Question.

Let's take for example an oil engineer. An oil engineer would accrue a reserve that would enable them to keep themselves afloat if out of work, reinvest a portion of their income, acquire a home, etc. Their "weal and woe" doesn't hinge solely on their ability to sell their labor power.

Whether they choose to do so is irrelevant to their class position, you can't just call petit-bourgeois who fail at capitalist competition proletarians while only calling the successful ones petit-bourgeois, that's not how scientific analysis works. To drive the point futher: let's say this offshore drilling engineer moves to San Francisco, where the cost of living is such that they can no longer accrue assets. Or: they squanders their money every month on frivolous shit. Are they now a proletarian? Maybe if some radical change to the market happened such that they lost their job and could never regain their position forcing them to work a shitty job, but then and only then would it be correct to call them proletarian. This is one example of what people mean by proletarianization.

Capital also means a lot more than just owning some physical business, for fuck's sake, especially under capitalism where money can be used to buy almost anything. The fact is: you do not get away from the messiness that offends your theoretical conscience in the conception I put forward with these kinds of formal considerations. The fuzziness of the middle classes is a specific characteristic of it!

>>40825
>reinvest a portion of their income
thats something different, that constitutes ownership of capital
>acquire a home
this is also different and more complex, i wouldn't say a mortgage is ownership and i dont think that a home constitutes productive property as capital, but if you want to say the first world is majority labor aristocrat im not gonna argue with that, but they would still be proles. if you want to argue that a home counts as an investment property even while its being used for living in that would at least be valid since it is based on ownership.

>One who holds savings in assets or even owns a house/real estate meaning property would be taken off the equation

<one who <owns property>meaning <property> would be taken off the equation
what

>Whether they choose to do so is irrelevant to their class position

yeah it has nothing to do with choice that is not what im saying. every worker could simply "choose" to start a business just like your doctor who "chooses" to open a practice. free movement between classes and temporarily embarrassed millionaires are a myth

>The fuzziness of the middle classes is a specific characteristic of it!

middle class isn't real. marx didn't say being a bourgeois capitalist is when you make lots of money, its when you make money from ownership.

>>40826
You have such a stupidly narrow view of what constitutes means of production or proletariat. Marx, Engels and Lenin repeatedly used the term middle-class too. Fucking read the shit you are arguing so vehemently about!

>every worker could simply "choose" to start a business

Wow, becoming a capitalist is just a matter of sheer will. And here I am wasting my time being a dumb wage laborer!!

>>40827
>becoming a capitalist is just a matter of sheer will
oh you are actually illiterate my bad

>>40826
>>40825
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-1/mswv1_1.htm
<The semi-proletariat. What is here called the semi-proletariat consists of five categories: (1) the overwhelming majority of the semi-owner peasants, [10] (2) the poor peasants, (3) the small handicraftsmen, (4) the shop assistants [11] and (5) the pedlars.
<The shop assistants are employees of shops and stores, supporting their families on meagre pay and getting an increase perhaps only once in several years while prices rise every year. If by chance you get into intimate conversation with them, they invariably pour out their endless grievances. Roughly the same in status as the poor peasants and the small handicraftsmen, they are highly receptive to revolutionary propaganda.
Mao identified semi-proletarian as a seperate class from proletarian. Most or perhaps all unproductive (from society's view, not that of capital, i.e., any who not contribute social aggregate product) workers fall into this category. The walmart cashier is semi-proletarian, not proletarian. Because Mao said so. The middle classes (semiproletarian and up) subsist on surplus-value of the actual producers. Stalinist 1956 proletarian political economic textbook teaches us this. https://www.marxists.org/subject/economy/authors/pe/pe-ch15.htm
<Furthermore, part of the national income is transferred, by way of payments for, what are called services, to the non-productive branches (e.g., for use of municipal services, medical aid, places of entertainment, etc.). As already pointed out, no social product is created in these branches, nor, consequently, any national income; but the capitalists who exploit the workers employed in these branches receive part of the national income created in the branches of material production. From this income the capitalists who own businesses in the non-productive branches pay the wages of their workers, meet the material outlay which they have to find (for premises, equipment, heating, etc.) and take their profit.

>>40829
>The middle classes (semiproletarian and up)
So the poor peasants are better off than regular workers? but also
>highly receptive to revolutionary propaganda.
?

>unproductive (from society's view, not that of capital

<From this income the capitalists who own businesses in the non-productive branches pay the wages of their workers

>>40828
>oh you are actually illiterate my bad
Bruh I'm going to scream, you haven't read any Marx at all and it shows. Even your one-liner taken from the marxists.org dictionary already proved you wrong. Your best retort to the fact that people who own reserves can invest them to accrue capital is that "any worker could choose to start a business". I mean what? Half of your posts don't even make sense.

>>40831
Ignore them, they are posting Mao.

>>40832
>Your best retort
slow down and read the posts you are responding to. im agreeing with you
>>40826
>it has nothing to do with choice
>that is not what im saying
>"choose" (scarequotes)
>your doctor
>>40804
>So class is now a matter of individual choice? A doctor can willingly go from proletarian to petit-bourgeois just by leaving their hospital and putting up their own practice
no its not, because people dont have the opportunity to make that choice. the people who have the opportunity to choose to open up their own practice already have access to enough investment capital that they are not proletariat, and most doctors do not have that. just like people who invest their reserves in the stock markets or whatever. if they have enough 'reserves' to live off dividends then they own capital.

>>40834
Yikes, that's actually fucking embarrassing from me. Sorry then.

>>40833
Mao's theory guided the most sucessful Communist revolution. Who are you to spit on Mao's theory?
>>40831
Mao explained the situation of the various strata of peasant in great detail. The semi-proletarian peasant was more revolutionary than the petite-bourgeois teacher, but the agricultural proletarian was more revolutionary than both. Mao illustrates why this is the case in great detail. Stalinist proletarian political science textboox illustrates how value is created and distributed in capitalist society, the basis of class.

>>40836
>The semi-proletarian peasant was more revolutionary
yeah but im wondering whether semi-proletariat is middle class and if its above or below proletariat, with proletariat being lower class and bourgeois being higher class. in the quote hes including poor peasants and land owning peasants, so this leads me to believe that hes saying peasants are like pre-proletariat, a feudal remnant, like the handicraftsmen that i assume are like artisans that directly sell the products of their own labor. the inclusion of poor peasants and and artisans together makes me think he is saying that are lower then proles, like lumpen proles, or that he is saying that are the same as proles, proletariat but only semi because they are fuedal remnants who havent transitioned to full prole. the inclusion of semi owner peasants is the same because they are tied to the land and have to work it and subsistence agriculture from a peasant doesn't rise to the level of petty-bourgeois. this is different from something like kulaks who used machinery or employed others.

I’m glad the feral furry pr0n rule got axed /s

>>40773
>Complains about Ordinance 4
>Thread becomes that which Ordinance 4 is there to prevent
Long live Ordinance 4

>>40850
nice tautology you fucking idiot, its still a better discussion than 95% of this shithole LOL

>>40780
>When you reduce ‘proletarian’ to a moral category equivalent to ‘good’, the obvious impulse is to depict yourself as a proletarian no matter what and people you dislike as middle-class. Even Lenin fell into this trap at times in his essays and moralized against the petit-bourgeois.
Yes. There is no contradiction between being a communist and not proletarian by this definition, in fact that is the historical tendency. Neither Marx, nor Engels, nor Lenin, nor a whole bunch of theorists and revolutionaries, are proletarian by this definition.
And it comes full circle. I begin to understand now, the so-called Trotsky-Stalin split is missing the point gravely. Socialism in backwards peasant states was doomed from the start, because either the peasants owned homes, or acquired homes in the wake of the revolution. No wonder then that the peasantry is reactionary, for it either owns capital or is a vestige of feudalism with all the backwards cultural assumptions. No wonder that the Soviet Union already in Lenin's time realized the problem with letting backwards citizens participate in politics outside local and workplace affairs was literal political suicide for the Soviet Union.
And then, of course, the issue of commodity production in socialist countries, which just ended up reinventing capitalism, put the leadership in a position where they used increasingly unsustainable state force to suppress the contradiction, the inevitable reactionary superstructure, and the socialist countries either imploded like the Warsaw Pact and Yugoslavia, or virtually gave up like China and Vietnam, or hyper-isolated like the DPRK.

I wish someone smarter than me would start spreading the word. Because I feel like if the misunderstandings and mistakes repeat, there will be no more chances for humanity.

>>40854 (me)
It also puts into perspective why the populations of ex-socialist countries are reactionary; why East Germany is more reactionary than West Germany today. Home ownership! God damn, I'm having a theory mindfuck. Everything is falling into place.

>>40854
>>40855
Yup, and all this is already in Marx and Engels. Goes to show how everyone namedropping them has never read them.

WHY HAS POST SEARCH BEEN DISABLED
I REPLY TO PEOPLE AND THEN CANNOT FIND THE ORIGINAL THREADS 2 DAYS LATER TO REPLY TO THEIR REPLY
FIX THIS SHIT

>>40860
Disabled as a precautionary. Right now it's under inspection/rewrite for possible SQL injection

>>40737
>The aim is to incentivize creativity

how does banning someone who picked a random image from their reaction folder incentivize creativity?

There's some kind of saying about 'if the only tool you have is a hammer..', that applies, what if you could find a way to curate a better board that didn't involve banning things, but something where you actually enocuraged positive action

Since the pepe/wojak banning, the board just feels LESS CREATIVE and more abrasive with the gap between users and mods widening.

just a very bizarre rule

>>40774
>That ordinance keeps the board rid having 14 different "are baristas proles" threads.

By not allowing any? Are the mods that incompetent that they can't direct discussion of an issue into one thread? Same with the HAZ stuff…Why can't that be discussed in the Internet general?

What is this obsession the new mod team has with telling people what they can and can't discuss?

the irony is that in order to make these ordinances, the mods must have had a discussion, so the implication is that they can discuss these things, but the dumb uncultured masses can't be trusted to.

>>40882
Consciousness resides in one's activity. That should tell you everything about their behavior.

>>39767
Then you should show more respect to college students then. Because they're often unfairly lumpenised

>>39767
>>40934
Lumpen is not a moral critique you stupid pieces of shit.

>>40782
>>40784
Students work dead end jobs that older people wouldn't want to do.

>>40936
>implying this is the norm anywhere
Being poor is not the sole requisite to be a proletarian.

>>40937
So then why does LeftyPol romanticise poverty as a virtue? Do you admit then that the excessive sympathy and glorification of delinquency is not proletarian?

File: 1745439234089.png (12.99 KB, 500x250, Oekaki.png)

>>40937
Then prole and student are two different booleans then, and someone claiming students can't be proles is evoking a form of real proletarian rhetoric then.

>>41013
>Then prole and student are two different booleans then
Yes?

>and someone claiming students can't be proles

There are proletarian students, they're just the overwhelming minority and either way all students are investing money hoping for returns (becoming proper citizens) so their consciousness reflects that.

File: 1745451891975.jpg (146.44 KB, 720x1099, engels middle class.jpg)


>>41018
>they're just the overwhelming minority
where?
>all students are investing money
scholarships

File: 1745461787142.png (18.97 KB, 348x324, ClipboardImage.png)


>>41040
Sooo… some people are middle-class proles?


Unique IPs: 23

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