yogthos

yogthos OP , 9 hours ago

It's always been a nonsense term, Parenti put it really well

Class gets its significance from the process of surplus extraction. The relationship between worker and owner is essentially an exploita­tive one, involving the constant transfer of wealth from those who labor (but do not own) to those who own (but do not labor). This is how some people get richer and richer without working, or with doing only a fraction of the work that enriches them, while others toil hard for an entire lifetime only to end up with little or nothing.

Those who occupy the higher circles of wealth and power are keenly aware of their own interests. While they sometimes seriously differ among themselves on specific issues, they exhibit an impres­sive cohesion when it comes to protecting the existing class system of corporate power, property, privilege, and profit. At the same time, they are careful to discourage public awareness of the class power they wield. They avoid the C-word, especially when used in reference to themselves as in "owning class;' "upper class;' or "moneyed class." And they like it least when the politically active elements of the owning class are called the "ruling class." The ruling class in this country has labored long to leave the impression that it does not exist, does not own the lion's share of just about everything, and does not exercise a vastly disproportionate influence over the affairs of the nation. Such precautions are them­selves symptomatic of an acute awareness of class interests.

Yet ruling class members are far from invisible. Their command positions in the corporate world, their control of international finance and industry, their ownership of the major media, and their influence over state power and the political process are all matters of public record- to some limited degree. While it would seem a sim­ple matter to apply the C-word to those who occupy the highest reaches of the C-world, the dominant class ideology dismisses any such application as a lapse into "conspiracy theory." The C-word is also taboo when applied to the millions who do the work of society for what are usually niggardly wages, the "working class," a term that is dismissed as Marxist jargon. And it is verboten to refer to the "exploiting and exploited classes;' for then one is talk­ing about the very essence of the capitalist system, the accumulation of corporate wealth at the expense of labor.

The C-word is an acceptable term when prefaced with the sooth­ing adjective "middle." Every politician, publicist, and pundit will rhapsodize about the middle class, the object of their heartfelt con­cern. The much admired and much pitied middle class is supposedly inhabited by virtuously self-sufficient people, free from the presumed profligacy of those who inhabit the lower rungs of soci­ety. By including almost everyone, "middle class" serves as a conve­niently amorphous concept that masks the exploitation and inequality of social relations. It is a class label that denies the actu­ality of class power.

The C-word is allowable when applied to one other group, the desperate lot who live on the lowest rung of society, who get the least of everything while being regularly blamed for their own victimiza­tion: the "underclass." References to the presumed deficiencies of underclass people are acceptable because they reinforce the existing social hierarchy and justify the unjust treatment accorded society's most vulnerable elements.

Seizing upon anything but class, leftists today have developed an array of identity groups centering around ethnic, gender, cultural, and life-style issues. These groups treat their respective grievances as something apart from class struggle, and have almost nothing to say about the increasingly harsh politico-economic class injustices perpe­trated against us all. Identity groups tend to emphasize their distinc­tiveness and their separateness from each other, thus fractionalizing the protest movement. To be sure, they have important contributions to make around issues that are particularly salient to them, issues often overlooked by others. But they also should not downplay their common interests, nor overlook the common class enemy they face. The forces that impose class injustice and economic exploitation are the same ones that propagate racism, sexism, militarism, ecological devastation, homophobia, xenophobia, and the like.

yogthos OP , 1 day ago

It's as if these sorts of operations don't attracts the most principled people. 🤣

yogthos OP Mod , 7 days ago

yup

yogthos OP Mod , 7 days ago

Indeed, it's so revealing when western mainstream press starts admitting that the rules were always meant to keep others down. Meanwhile, the whole defending the free world narrative is gonna be mighty hard to peddle given how economic situation in the west continues to unravel.

The reality that libs are incapable of acknowledging is that material conditions are what people care about first and foremost. The abstract freedoms they champion are intangible, and don't translate into anything meaningful for the vast majority of the people. When you can't afford food, housing, education, or healthcare, being told you're living in a free country becomes a farce.

yogthos OP Mod , 7 days ago

Don't forget the most important freedom of all, the freedom to choose your exploiter.

yogthos OP Mod , 7 days ago

LOL yeah, a handful of megacorps are now providing jobs for the vast majority of the population.

yogthos OP Mod , 6 days ago

I love how they still see themselves as the good guys.

yogthos OP Mod , 6 days ago

Oh yeah it's absolutely a dog whistle for the superior western civilization that's run by white people.

yogthos OP , 9 days ago (edited 8 days ago)

Anything relating to the subjects of history, politics, or economics in western academia is basically just thinly veiled propaganda for the empire. The goal is, in each case, to indoctrinate people into a narrative that explains why western system is the best one possible, and then have them authoritatively regurgitate this narrative.

yogthos Mod , 10 days ago

I think he's correct that China wants to move USD and Euro into Chinese banks and then use these assets to collateralize new loans in any currency, and create new economic growth elsewhere. It makes sense to start moving assets out before things deteriorate to the point when it's no longer possible to do. This way they can potentially use these assets to kick start a new BRICS trading system.

yogthos OP , 11 days ago

it's a luxury because people don't have the time to cook between juggling multiple full time jobs.

yogthos OP , 13 days ago

yeah seriously