• HerbalGamer@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    In my mind it’s always comes down to a very simple question: Do they have to work for someone, or does someone work for them? If the first is true, they’re working class, if the second, they’re capitalist class, aka ruling class.

    There is no middle class.

    • LinkedinLenin [any, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Eh I just don’t think there’s much utility in being so strict with categories. That’s fine as a shorthand though, and for explaining to coworkers who aren’t familiar with the theories.

      But the point of a material analysis is to, well, analyze. What are people’s material interests? How do those interests shape a person’s revolutionary or reactionary potential?

      Rather than try to illustrate it myself with made-up examples, I’m gonna delete the paragraph I wrote and just post an actual material analysis from history

      • HerbalGamer@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I just don’t think there’s much utility in being so strict with categories

        The whole point is that we’re fighting amongst ourselves about what basically amounts to comfort levels for the most of us, while we should all look at each other as comrades to stand with against those that are actively taking advantage of all of us plus the rift we’ve created between ourselves.

        • LinkedinLenin [any, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I agree with the sentiment, but please do read the essay I linked. It really changed the way I thought about things.

          It’s very much about strategizing and analysis, not moralizing or dividing or anything like that.