Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

So, Class

Wolveryeti. Let's get clear what you're saying first.

"Why do left wing intellectuals lionise the working class, when historically the first thing the working class do when they get into power is shoot them?"
Help me with the syntax here. Who is shooting whom?

Go on then, indulge me. Let's have your top three examples of working class revolutions that did not involve intellectual repression on a grand scale.
And here, who is repressing whom?
 
Much more interesting question:

"Why do left wing intellectuals lionise the working class, when historically the first thing the working class do when they get into power is shoot them?"

A nice line, but untrue. The bloodiest revolutionaries of history tended towards liquidating aristos.
 
Oh, right, I hadn't thought that someone would be so crass as to assume that social class could be a determinate of intelligence

I'm not saying that. But there is an unpleasantly large correlation between working class revolutions and anti-intellectualism. In Cambodia you could get shot just for wearing glasses. Lots of people copped the bullet in China and Russia for no other reason than they were clever and therefore possibly a threat. Even in the now, in an age when students are really under the cosh financially, you don't have to go far to find an idiot spouting casual bile about how they're lazy, sponging cunts.

Class war is such a stupid concept anyway. Surely there will be people you identify with and people you despise in every social echelon... Doesn't it therefore make more sense to root out who is who on a case by case basis rather than arbitrarily grouping people together based on a few arbitrary indicators?
 
Class war is such a stupid concept anyway. Surely there will be people you identify with and people you despise in every social echelon... Doesn't it therefore make more sense to root out who is who on a case by case basis rather than arbitrarily grouping people together based on a few arbitrary indicators?

You clearly don't understand what is meant by "class" in this context.
 
Class war is such a stupid concept anyway. Surely there will be people you identify with and people you despise in every social echelon... Doesn't it therefore make more sense to root out who is who on a case by case basis rather than arbitrarily grouping people together based on a few arbitrary indicators?

You really don't understand what you're on about do you? It's about how society is structured, not individuals. Which is the original point of the thread
 
Formulating ideas of social relations based on the arbitrary groupings of class is a logic which is predestined to result in people forming stereotypes of one another to hate.
 
Formulating ideas of social relations based on the arbitrary groupings of class is a logic which is predestined to result in people forming stereotypes of one another to hate.

thats not how class analysis works though, is it? It is not arbitrary at all.
 
thats not how class analysis works though, is it? It is not arbitrary at all.

How come there is so much disagreement over what constitutes 'middle class' and 'working class' then?

Is being middle class good? Is being working class good? Does it matter?

Do I understand what class means? Does Blagsta?

Again- a lot of disagreement.
 
How come there is so much disagreement over what constitutes 'middle class' and 'working class' then?

Is being middle class good? Is being working class good? Does it matter? Again- a lot of disagreement.

This is because you don't know what is meant by "class".
 
How come there is so much disagreement over what constitutes 'middle class' and 'working class' then?

Is being middle class good? Is being working class good? Does it matter? Again- a lot of disagreement.

are we talking cultural habits or economic realities? The source of the disagreement lies precisely in the confusion between economic and social definitions of class.
 
No. It's a massively contested topic. You could ask a hundred people in the street and get a hundred different interpretations.

I could a hundred different people about their opinions on quantum physics and get a hundred different responses too. Peoples confusion on a matter does not translate automatically into valid criticism, specially on a street poll.
 
According to you, perhaps. Who's to say that, for instance, going to university is an irrelevant cultural signifier whereas shareholding is not?

Perhaps somebody who cares to examine how each one affects one's socio-economic role?

"Class" does have a technical meaning, you know. It's not the same as the social grouping one. You might as well say there's disagreement about what "negative" means because, you know, electrons are negative but also opinions are negative oh no.
 
Take this thread then. We have already discovered clear water between you and Fridgemagnet in your explanations of how people get class boundaries wrong (suggesting you disagree over what those boundaries actually are).

are we talking cultural habits or economic realities? The source of the disagreement lies precisely in the confusion between economic and social definitions of class.

because people mix up emergent cultural signifiers of class and actual analysis of someone's socio-economic role?

Perhaps it would be enlightening one way or the other if everyone on this thread divulged what their method of determining class is...
 
Back
Top Bottom