dennisr
the acceptable face
is he?
- whats he doing then - 'reaping the profits of other people's labour' like all bosses??(think about it uberdog...)
working class, what does it mean?
- Thread starter sinbad
- Start date
is he?
- whats he doing then - 'reaping the profits of other people's labour' like all bosses??(think about it uberdog...)
Das Uberdog
remembers the alamo
Read the definition of petit-bourgeois. It is quite a different experience working for yourself and working as part of a collective. You can still be exploited - 'course you can - but it's a different form of exploitation, and ultimately you have more freedom to choose what you do and how you do it.
The petit-bourgeois don't have the same class interests as the bourgeois proper - but they have the potential to. Why'd you think all the Midland's 'white-van men' upped sticks and voted Tory in the 80s? Different class interest, mate.
Seriously didn't realise this was contentious. Well, it's NOT, in reality.
The petit-bourgeois don't have the same class interests as the bourgeois proper - but they have the potential to. Why'd you think all the Midland's 'white-van men' upped sticks and voted Tory in the 80s? Different class interest, mate.
Seriously didn't realise this was contentious. Well, it's NOT, in reality.
dennisr
the acceptable face
It may surprise you but some workers can, at various times and in various places, earn a good wack - it doesn't make them bosses. marx, the old lumpen-petty-bourg would have said 'good on you, get what you can out of them'
you are falling for a definition of class that is very un-marxist (for a marxist, like...)
you are falling for a definition of class that is very un-marxist (for a marxist, like...)
Das Uberdog
remembers the alamo
You seem to have mixed up 'working-class' with being poor and working hard - they're not the same.
Edit; and/or you're not automatically a worker if that's the position you're in
Edit; and/or you're not automatically a worker if that's the position you're in
Surely your only not working class if you own the means of production and live off of the profits of other peoples labour, why is there a need to distinguish between working class and middle class? Even if your a manager your still selling your labour at a surplus. So why create this difference?
Das Uberdog
remembers the alamo
No, you can live off the profits of your own labour and not be a worker - that's what I'm saying.
dennisr
the acceptable face
The marxist definiton of petty-bourg does not include the vast majority of workers who may be doing well for themselves for a moment or have illusions as to their own class loyalty at any given moment.
What is contentious - considering that you consider yourself to be a marxist - is that you are yourself in effect writing off a large (and important) section of the working classes in this country plus you are basing your version of class strugle on some fantasy ida of blue-collared, cloth-capped sons (and maybe some daughters...) of toil which bears little relation to the reality of modern britain.
You - in effect have defeated your own 'marxist' arguement about the centrality of class struggle to any meaningful change of society
- given they are apparently a minority of society - a sectional interest based on your own definition of what is or is not 'working class'
Das Uberdog
remembers the alamo
Wrong.
You, on the other hand, have incorrectly labelled such economic groups as the peasantry and self-employed builders into the 'working-class' under the pretences of a 'proper Marxist analysis'.
You, on the other hand, have incorrectly labelled such economic groups as the peasantry and self-employed builders into the 'working-class' under the pretences of a 'proper Marxist analysis'.
dennisr
the acceptable face
interesting - how is this done then?? (is it like hippy stall holders selling jewelry - are they petty bourg)??
Depends totally on what you understand by "work".
Why is there a need to make any distinction between humans?
salaam.
dennisr
the acceptable face
Sounds like you have a better undertanding of a 'marxist' viewpoint than the self-professed 'marxist'
Das Uberdog
remembers the alamo
Peasant/crofter, Gypsy dancer, travelling salesman or self employed builder
chilango
Ha! Ha! Armageddon
Well?
dennisr
the acceptable face
because, after I don't know how many hundreds of years of the reality of the differing individual relationships to the means of production resulting in our 'elders and betters' deciding our lives to a great extent for us - it would be a bit daft to pretend that that is not the reality.
I am not saying 'humans' are different - but their individual relationships to the given power structures within a given society are different and - for me - class is the defining factor in that relationship (as opposed to ownership of whippets etc)
Yes, you can... like a self employed plumber? Does that mean a self employed plumber is middle class but a middle manager isn't?
But even in that situation are you still not subtly working for someone else? The bank? Loans and interest they may own your business on paper. It depends who your work for I suppose. But you are still at the mercy off supply and demand in a way that a capital holder isn't, depending on how much you earn? Your still selling your labour rather than making money by having money, iyswim?
dennisr
the acceptable face
Peasant/crofter, Gypsy dancer, travelling salesman or self employed builder
gypsy dancer!! - now you are trying to bring 'race' into it
(my mum's a gypsy by the way - don't dance very well though...)
dennisr
the acceptable face
Das Uberdog
remembers the alamo
chilango said:
Your point is essentially the point that dennisr referred to (albeit from a socialist's perspective):
dennisr said:
He essentially accuses me of implicitly recognising what you claim to be the case.
In response, I would argue that capital is a global system and in a country like Britain, class divisions have been blurred and a proper understanding of what class is has been lost from our collective understanding. Globally class is just as obvious as it ever has been - in Britain it may be a different story. However, in Britain there is an increase in class-divide occurring, and a renewed potential for founding a reawakened sense of class consciousness. In my opinion, if self-employed builders and gypsy dancers want to get in on the action then they should be welcome to do so - but at the end of the day the revolution will be built on the foundations laid by the real working class, defined by Marx.
Das Uberdog
remembers the alamo
gypsy dancer!! - now you are trying to bring 'race' into it
The race is 'Roma' innit? Not 'Gypsy' (which as far as I'm aware is simply a mode of living).
Das Uberdog
remembers the alamo
I understand exactly what you mean, but the relationship between employee and employer is completely different. In fact (in economic terms) the relationship between the capital holder and the agent of labour in your scenario is no different from that of a private GP and someone seeking treatment. Is a GP working class? If not, why not?
Das Uberdog
remembers the alamo
It's 'cos you urbz don't understand proper Marx.
dennisr
the acceptable face
well, there you are trampling clumsily through a whole other set of thorny bushes - idea of what is meant by 'race' and all - but, try telling the people my family grew up among that they were part of 'one big happy family' and you would get quite a lot of what could be construed as 'racist backlash'. And sometimes the reaction to this makes folk feel outside otr different - as roma experience
being working class is also not a 'mode of living' its a 'class' difference (if i can take the liberty of using this instead of your example of 'race') for marxists
a self-employed plumbers class position (and mode of living I suppose...) is (usually and generally) closer to that of other workers than to that of a small businessman or senior bureaucrat or 'manager'. imo
dennisr
the acceptable face
Is the GP a boss?
Is the GP an 'in-betweenie' - say a petty-bourg? How about GPs in big hospitals? or a one person practice in a village somewhere
you could tie yourself up in knots with this - the key point a marxist would make is that the vast majority of people are workers (regardless of what they consider themselves to be at any given moment) - a smaller minority (the petty lot!) can waver between seeing their interests as at one with the tiny minority who own the means of production and that big majority (the workers). They are the small group torn between material interests and the bigger interests they are stuck between (resenting/envious the bosses looking down on them - fearing the workers looking up at them)
class is a useful way of losely defining the big/qualitative antagonistic interests in this society (it is never 100% accurate - but is a useful generalisation) - its no good or 'individual' self-definitions (ie how you may see 'yourself' personally and how hard done by you may personally feel !)
Das Uberdog
remembers the alamo
But their economic relation to their 'employer' is more similar to that of a GP, am I not right?
Surely you know what a self-employed GP is? They're someone with a skill, and they sell that skill to those with the capital necessary to obtain it... They are a 'professional' - like a builder.
Edit: just to point out I'm nt the one tying myself up in knots - my definition and explanation has been clear, simple and above all consistent throughout this whole thread.
Surely you know what a self-employed GP is? They're someone with a skill, and they sell that skill to those with the capital necessary to obtain it... They are a 'professional' - like a builder.
Edit: just to point out I'm nt the one tying myself up in knots - my definition and explanation has been clear, simple and above all consistent throughout this whole thread.
dennisr
the acceptable face
'bloody stuuuudent' more like
No, I don't think so and home ownership for example puts lots of people in the position of petty bourgeois, by dennisr's definition. That's where the problem lies in my mind. Not in home ownership, but the idea that if you own a home your interests are the same as the people with the money...
Similar threads
