Are retail workers Lumpen?

[BabylonHoruv]

Ok, if the proleteriat are those who actually make things, does that make those in the retail industry, who have no control over the means of production, but also do not produce anything, lumpenproleteriat? We are clearly dependent on the capitalist system, we aren't bourgoisie, or Petite Bourgoisie, or proleteriat, as we make nothing. This would also include truck drivers, warehouse workers, and many other workers in the US, in fact, in the US, probably the manority of workers would fall under this category, and if not the majority at least a very sizable minority. Also, if we approach things from a marxist perspective, it means that the US is not in a good position for a revolution, and will not be unless things change drastically, as the focus of labor is moving away from production.

[RHIZOMES]

Ok, if the proleteriat are those who actually make things, does that make those in the retail industry, who have no control over the means of production, but also do not produce anything, lumpenproleteriat? We are clearly dependent on the capitalist system, we aren't bourgoisie, or Petite Bourgoisie, or proleteriat, as we make nothing. This would also include truck drivers, warehouse workers, and many other workers in the US, in fact, in the US, probably the manority of workers would fall under this category, and if not the majority at least a very sizable minority. Also, if we approach things from a marxist perspective, it means that the US is not in a good position for a revolution, and will not be unless things change drastically, as the focus of labor is moving away from production.

Their labour time spent manning the store is a value which turns a profit for the capitalists.

[Pogue]

No, they are proletarian, as they sell their labour for a wage, labour which fulfills a vital part of keeping capitalist society afloat. Being proletarian doesn't just mean you produce something. Following your logic, only factory workers would be proletarians.

[LOLseph Stalin]

As others have said retail workers are indeed proletarian. Lumpens are those who don't work(and leech off the welfare system, reducing the quality for those who actually need it) and/or commit crimes and cause more harm than good to society. Hopefully society will just ignore them after the revolution, causing them to eventually go away.

[Pogue]

As others have said retail workers are indeed proletarian. Lumpens are those who don't work and/or commit crimes and cause more harm than good to society. Hopefully society will just ignore them after the revolution, causing them to eventually go away.

I don't think criminals and the unemployed are dealt with by ignoring them.

[OriginalGumby]

I agree with what has been previously said. Workers in service sectors have power over the system. They have the power to stop producing their service which is generating profits. Also many strikes have involved and have been led by service workers.
http://socialistworker.org/2009/07/16/seattle-in-workers-hands
http://socialistworker.org/2009/03/20/rebellion-in-minneapolis

Also here is an article that talks about the us working class today that makes the case that in the US the key to successful struggle is still the working class.
http://www.isreview.org/issues/52/postindustrial.shtml

[LOLseph Stalin]

I don't think criminals and the unemployed are dealt with by ignoring them.

Well if people refuse to work, we shouldn't be expected to support them. In a Socialist Society everybody should be expected to do their share to the best of their ability if they want to be provided for.

[OriginalGumby]

As others have said retail workers are indeed proletarian. Lumpens are those who don't work(and leech off the welfare system, reducing the quality for those who actually need it) and/or commit crimes and cause more harm than good to society. Hopefully society will just ignore them after the revolution, causing them to eventually go away.

This is all sorts of fucked up. Leech of the system, really? That is a standard right wing talking point. The leeches are the fucking capitalists. And to think that the immiseration of a section of society because they can not be profitably employed is their fault and that they do not deserve support is just dead wrong. We must be in solidarity with the poor. Workers movements should demand job creation and unemployment benefits and link arms to fight together with the lumen proletariat JUST BECAUSE ITS RIGHT!!! And furthermore the lumen proletariat may be persuaded to join the other side and be the armed thugs of the counter-revolutionaries if they are not persuaded that our side is their side. This has happened before, in Germany prior to Hitler. They will go away after socialism is won because poverty and desperation and oppression will be destroyed by our united blow.

[OriginalGumby]

This is not socialism that we live in now. People are not poor and jobless because they are lazy. There is a recession!!!! And even when there isn't mass layoffs there is never 100% unemployment.

A democratically controlled economy run by the majority of society is socialism and we can figure out what to do with people who don't want to pitch in then. Maybe we will make them clean the bathrooms.

[khad]

And furthermore the lumen proletariat may be persuaded to join the other side and be the armed thugs of the counter-revolutionaries if they are not persuaded that our side is their side. This has happened before, in Germany prior to Hitler. They will go away after socialism is won because poverty and desperation and oppression will be destroyed by our united blow.
The lumpenproletariat are inherently reactionary and are armed by the state to smash workers' uprisings. You cannot expect thieves, pimps, and drug dealers who have been preying on their own communities for years to just suddenly do an about face and stand with those same communities in solidarity. That is unrealistic and suicidal. This is why the Paris Commune and revolutionary movements throughout history have dealt very harshly with this kind of predatory behavior.

Marx and Engels also sometimes put mercenaries of the state (ie professional soldiers and police) into this category.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/06/01d.htm


Admiral Baudin was lying with a fairly large, French fleet before Naples. A simple but timely threat to fire upon the castle and the forts would have forced Ferdinand to yield. But Baudin, one of Louis Philippe’s old servants who was used to the earlier period of the entente cordiale[18] (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/cw/volume07/footnote.htm#18) when the existence of the French fleet was merely tolerated, remained inactive, thereby causing the lazzaroni, who were already leaning towards the people, to join the troops.

This action of the Neapolitan lumpenproletariat decided the defeat of the revolution. Swiss guardsmen, Neapolitan soldiers and lazzaroni combined pounced upon the defenders of the barricades. The palaces along Toledo Street, which had been swept clean with grape-shot, collapsed under the cannon-balls of the troops. The frantic mob of victors tore into the houses, stabbed the men, speared the children, violated the women only to murder them afterwards, plundered everything in sight and then set fire to the pillaged dwellings. The lazzaroni proved to be the greediest and the Swiss the most brutal. The base acts and barbarities accompanying the victory of the well-armed and four times stronger Bourbon mercenaries and the always sanfedistic[19] (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/cw/volume07/footnote.htm#19) lazzaroni over the nearly destroyed national guard of Naples, are indescribable.
This is not socialism that we live in now. People are not poor and jobless because they are lazy. There is a recession!!!! And even when there isn't mass layoffs there is never 100% unemployment.

A democratically controlled economy run by the majority of society is socialism and we can figure out what to do with people who don't want to pitch in then. Maybe we will make them clean the bathrooms.

True. Declaring welfare recipients lumpen is a misapplication of the theory. Many of them are just people who are out of work, not people who are actively exploiting their own communities.

[LOLseph Stalin]

This is all sorts of fucked up. Leech of the system, really? That is a standard right wing talking point. The leeches are the fucking capitalists.

Of course the leeches are the Capitalists, but it just makes me think. There's people now who refuse to work. Of course under a better system(Socialism) many of these people will have more potential to work, but that still won't change the lumpenproletariat from existing. We need to deal with them somehow. Only thing I can suggest is throwing them into labour camps.

[BabylonHoruv]

As others have said retail workers are indeed proletarian. Lumpens are those who don't work(and leech off the welfare system, reducing the quality for those who actually need it) and/or commit crimes and cause more harm than good to society. Hopefully society will just ignore them after the revolution, causing them to eventually go away.


I sell drugs. Now the drug i sell is legal, and purchased by respectable members of the community, but it does not serve a medical purpose and aside from the legal part my job is really not much different from that of a weed dealer or crack dealer. I sell wine in specific.

Now, it is possible you are not including drug dealers, prostitutes, and other "vice" criminals in your definition, so I apologize if I am over generalizing. I had thought that entertainers were also considered part of the lumpen.

[BabylonHoruv]

Of course the leeches are the Capitalists, but it just makes me think. There's people now who refuse to work. Of course under a better system(Socialism) many of these people will have more potential to work, but that still won't change the lumpenproletariat from existing. We need to deal with them somehow. Only thing I can suggest is throwing them into labour camps.

Declares you not my comrade.

[LOLseph Stalin]

I sell drugs. Now the drug i sell is legal, and purchased by respectable members of the community, but it does not serve a medical purpose and aside from the legal part my job is really not much different from that of a weed dealer or crack dealer. I sell wine in specific.

Now, it is possible you are not including drug dealers, prostitutes, and other "vice" criminals in your definition, so I apologize if I am over generalizing. I had thought that entertainers were also considered part of the lumpen.

I don't see you as a lumpen because you're breaking no laws by selling wine. Drug dealers on the other hand are. They could be considered lumpens if they're selling purely for personal profit. However, if they're selling drugs to keep themselves off the streets because they can't get any other work then I may sympathize with them. Of course this would depend completely on circumstances. Capitalism just forces desperate people to come to desperate solutions. It's the harsh reality. Prostitution on the other hand, I find to be exploitative of women. However, if a woman wants to be a prostitute that's her own choice.

[khad]

However, if a woman wants to be a prostitute that's her own choice.
There are very, very few women who "choose" to be prostitutes without facing dire problems with finances and/or substance abuse. Even then, by some estimates more than 80% of those in the sex industry were sexually abused as children. "Free choice" hardly ever exists except in the minds of libertarians.


Of course the leeches are the Capitalists, but it just makes me think. There's people now who refuse to work. Of course under a better system(Socialism) many of these people will have more potential to work, but that still won't change the lumpenproletariat from existing. We need to deal with them somehow. Only thing I can suggest is throwing them into labour camps.
I think a distinction has to be made between those who are relatively harmless and those who have the mentality of "I ain't gonna be a chump like the rest of these fools in the 'hood." The latter tend to be criminals who hold themselves above and exploit the working class.

[OriginalGumby]

The lumpenproletariat are inherently reactionary and are armed by the state to smash workers' uprisings. You cannot expect thieves, pimps, and drug dealers who have been preying on their own communities for years to just suddenly do an about face and stand with those same communities in solidarity. That is unrealistic and suicidal.

Marx and Engels also sometimes lumped in mercenaries of the state (ie professional soldiers and police into this category).

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/06/01d.htm



Except that in written history of struggle in the US the unemployed have worked with the employed for common demands. Maybe I am thinking about lumpens the wrong way. Long time criminals and such would be more likely to take capitalist funds but the ranks of the reactionary or fascist forces come from the newly unemployed. I like Trotsky's The Struggle against Fascism in Germany because it analyzes the class basis for a fascist movement in the immiserated middle class opposed to the state and big business but no friends of the workers movement either. These elements can be pulled along by the workers movement if it recognizes a common interest but the middle class varies. Academics, proffessionals, small business owners, even many students can go either way. It is our task to win them to our side.

[The Ungovernable Farce]

As others have said retail workers are indeed proletarian. Lumpens are those who don't work(and leech off the welfare system, reducing the quality for those who actually need it) and/or commit crimes and cause more harm than good to society.
What about a worker with a "decent, respectable" who also commits crimes? Lumpen or non-lumpen?

The lumpenproletariat are inherently reactionary and are armed by the state to smash workers' uprisings.
Why did the Black Panthers recruit so many "lumpens" then?

I don't see you as a lumpen because you're breaking no laws by selling wine.
Because the laws of the capitalist state are a good standard to judge things by?

[khad]

Except that in written history of struggle in the US the unemployed have worked with the employed for common demands. Maybe I am thinking about lumpens the wrong way. Long time criminals and such would be more likely to take capitalist funds but the ranks of the reactionary or fascist forces come from the newly unemployed. I like Trotsky's The Struggle against Fascism in Germany because it analyzes the class basis for a fascist movement in the immiserated middle class opposed to the state and big business but no friends of the workers movement either. These elements can be pulled along by the workers movement if it recognizes a common interest but the middle class varies. Academics, proffessionals, small business owners, even many students can go either way. It is our task to win them to our side.

You responded before I added the second part to my post. "Declaring welfare recipients lumpen is a misapplication of the theory. Many of them are just people who are out of work, not people who are actively exploiting their own communities."


Why did the Black Panthers recruit so many "lumpens" then?There was a reason at first, but if you look at where black power has ended up, look at the New Black Panther Party, which is full of gangsters and criminal types, who have been publicly bashed by some members of the original Black Panthers for their predatory behavior. With the rhetoric of harnessing the lumpenproletariat, the degeneration was inevitable.

[LOLseph Stalin]

What about a worker with a "decent, respectable" who also commits crimes? Lumpen or non-lumpen?

Then they'll be dealt with by the community in a reasonable manner, just like lumpens should.


Because the laws of the capitalist state are a good standard to judge things by?

They aren't, but it's what we have to go by until we have a Socialist revolution.

[OriginalGumby]

Of course the leeches are the Capitalists, but it just makes me think. There's people now who refuse to work. Of course under a better system(Socialism) many of these people will have more potential to work, but that still won't change the lumpenproletariat from existing. We need to deal with them somehow. Only thing I can suggest is throwing them into labour camps.

People are not static in their ideas and ways. Do you really think a revolutionary movement would change nothing for these people? And maybe forced labor or prison time or a time out will be needed for some but that is not the issue. Most people hate jobs if they have one because the jobs are boring, assine, things where you have no control in what is produced and no stake in the system. Its not yours, it's someone elses. Socialism would be very different, the system then belongs to all of us.

[OriginalGumby]

They aren't, but it's what we have to go by until we have a Socialist revolution.

Thats silly, what about slavery, war, environmental destruction, tax cuts for the rich, government bailouts for the rich, and on and on. All legal or used to be. All justified and allowed by the laws of the capitalist state. Should we support that??? No way!

[LOLseph Stalin]

People are not static in their ideas and ways. Do you really think a revolutionary movement would change nothing for these people? And maybe forced labor or prison time or a time out will be needed for some but that is not the issue. Most people hate jobs if they have one because the jobs are boring, assine, things where you have no control in what is produced and no stake in the system. Its not yours, it's someone elses. Socialism would be very different, the system then belongs to all of us.

That's what I was trying to say in an earlier post. There's people now who choose not to work because they hate it. Why? Because they're forced to do shitty jobs to produce stuff for a Capitalist slave master while getting nothing in return. In Socialism this wouldn't be the case with alot of people. I just don't feel everybody will change overnight. It may take longer for some others.

[khad]

Because the laws of the capitalist state are a good standard to judge things by?
I want to see you talk socialism to pimps, thieves, and con men. These people have more incentive to be capitalist than anyone in the real working class.

You kids who idealize criminals have no idea of the petit bourgeois, anti-community mentality that many of them adopt.

[LOLseph Stalin]

Thats silly, what about slavery, war, environmental destruction, tax cuts for the rich, government bailouts for the rich, and on and on. All legal or used to be. All justified and allowed by the laws of the capitalist state. Should we support that??? No way!

Of course not, but I don't see any laws changing unless we fight for it. Even then the Bourgeoisie will still want laws to cater to their own interests.

[The Ungovernable Farce]

Then they'll be dealt with by the community in a reasonable manner, just like lumpens should.

But you were saying that lumpens were people who commit crimes. I really don't see how whether people break the law or not affects their class position.

People are not static in their ideas and ways. Do you really think a revolutionary movement would change nothing for these people? And maybe forced labor or prison time or a time out will be needed for some but that is not the issue. Most people hate jobs if they have one because the jobs are boring, assine, things where you have no control in what is produced and no stake in the system. Its not yours, it's someone elses. Socialism would be very different, the system then belongs to all of us.
This. I like William Morris's distinction between useful work and useless toil (http://www.marxists.org/archive/morris/works/1884/useful.htm).

[OriginalGumby]

Oh forgot charging a price for food that not everyone can afford and destroying extra food to keep the price higher while people starve to death. Are these within legal boundaries? Yes. Should we respect these and defend these as right because their all we got? NO! These laws are fucked up and are indefensible and the whole system has to go and be replaced.

[The Ungovernable Farce]

I want to see you talk socialism to pimps, thieves, and con men.
And you want a revolution made by nice, respectable upstanding folk who won't walk on the grass.


You kids who idealize criminals have no idea of the petit bourgeois, anti-community mentality that many of them adopt.
I know that a lot of criminals are dicks. A lot of workers have a reactionary anti-immigrant mentality as well. I'm optimistic about the possibility of changing people's ideas.

[LOLseph Stalin]

But you were saying that lumpens were people who commit crimes. I really don't see how whether people break the law or not affects their class position.

Many of them are, but of course not all. Perhaps I was generalizing a bit too much. Anyway, anybody who breaks the laws in a Socialist society regardless of their class position should still be dealt with according to the community's wishes.

[khad]

But you were saying that lumpens were people who commit crimes. I really don't see how whether people break the law or not affects their class position.
When the attitude of these criminals is "I'm gonna fuck these stupid chumps in the hood," and turn their nose up at any sort of community solidarity, you bet it does. These sorts actively hold themselves above the working class people who tend to be their victims.


And you want a revolution made by nice, respectable upstanding folk who won't walk on the grass.
I choose not to make common cause with people who have more incentive than anyone to be petit bourgeois and exploitative.

[The Ungovernable Farce]

When the attitude of these criminals is "I'm gonna fuck these stupid chumps in the hood," and turn their nose up at any sort of community solidarity, you bet it does.
And all working-class people automatically have perfect solidarity? Workers never have shitty attitudes?

[khad]

And all working-class people automatically have perfect solidarity? Workers never have shitty attitudes?
Sure workers can have shitty attitudes, but there is much more potential to build community solidarity around them. They're not the ones who are basing their entire existence on destroying their communities.

If one don't understand this, I don't see how one can be a socialist.

[*Red*Alert]

No, they are proletarian, as they sell their labour for a wage, labour which fulfills a vital part of keeping capitalist society afloat. Being proletarian doesn't just mean you produce something. Following your logic, only factory workers would be proletarians.
Again we find ourselves in agreement, Comrade Pogue.

The entire Retail sector is a essential element of the capitalist system, and those who work in it are a merely extension of the same Proletariat which toils in the factories to produce the goods sold by the Retail sector. Neither have any control over the instruments of production but are merely hired for their labour (even if that labour is simply depositing money into a till all day).

From my understanding (and I'm open to correction) of the meaning "Lumpen Proletariat" I believe it defines Proles who are a obstacle to the organising of the Proletariat, so to speak, such as drug dealers, pimps, money-lenders, petty criminals, etc.

[Revy]

Retail workers are proletarian. It's pretty bizarre to claim they are lumpen or petty bourgeois. The proletariat does not apply to only those that "make things".

[spiltteeth]

Sure workers can have shitty attitudes, but there is much more potential to build community solidarity around them. They're not the ones who are basing their entire existence on destroying their communities.

If one don't understand this, I don't see how one can be a socialist.


This thread is terribly offensive. I am an ex-con. I've been to prison. Most of my life has been as criminal. These assertions sound like child-like Glen Beck BS - yea, criminals wake up and consciously decide to base
"their entire existence on destroying their communities." Isn't that what Wal-mart employees also do? Decide, "I'm gonna be part of an organization that destroys communities and small businesses, exploits 3rd world nations, wreaks environmental devastation, and helps destroy the world." What the hell do you do for a living? Virtually ALL capitalist enterprises do this. Criminal enterprises are usually just like normal capitalist jobs without the illusions. I'm a fish butcher - I work for a huge multi glomorate super market chain that exploits workers, produces tons of garbage, sells crap that nobody needs and is strait bad for your, the salmon I sell is over fished with pollution industrial boats etc etc etc
As socialists usually argue, merely working in a capitalist society causes people ti be greedy and competitive.
I really want to know what Khad and Solidaritywithiran do for work that is so constructive for their communities.
You know its against the law to start a revolution to so I guess we all ought to respect that and stop right now guys.
There are plenty of criminals who are psychopathic, and plenty who just have to act that way TO SURVIVE -just like I have to be part of an exploitive system to survive.
Gee why are they "anti-community"? Because the community is set up in such a way that IT IS DESTROYING THEM! Yes, they ought to try to improve things, I suppose you liberal idealist republican pricks will say.
However most criminals are non-violent drug offenders. There's just as much revolutionary potential there as there is in any Cosco's or hard ware store. Actually more, since most are consciously exploited and not brain-washed by the media.
I am disgusted with the bourgeois attitudes here.
Oh, and I'll say that many criminals work harder than most super-market employees that I've been around. Being a criminal IS WORK.

[khad]

There are plenty of criminals who are psychopathic, and plenty who just have to act that way TO SURVIVE -just like I have to be part of an exploitive system to survive.
Gee why are they "anti-community"? Because the community is set up in such a way that IT IS DESTROYING THEM! Yes, they ought to try to improve things, I suppose you liberal idealist republican pricks will say.
However most criminals are non-violent drug offenders. There's just as much revolutionary potential there as there is in any Cosco's or hard ware store. Actually more, since most are consciously exploited and not brain-washed by the media.
I am disgusted with the bourgeois attitudes here.
Oh, and I'll say that many criminals work harder than most super-market employees that I've been around. Being a criminal IS WORK.
Spare me. There's a difference between street-level mules, many of whom run or deal a little drugs on the side due to economic hardship (while holding part or fulltime jobs) and people whose criminal behavior sustains them outside the economy. With them you are dealing with a virtual petit bourgeoisie leading up to lumpenbourgeois when you are talking about pimps and high-level drug barons. I make the same argument about their revolutionary potential as I would with the "real" petit bourgeoisie.

Being criminal as a lifestyle is not "work." It is predation upon working people just like, you guessed it, capitalists.

[spiltteeth]

Spare me. There's a difference between street-level mules, many of whom run or deal a little drugs on the side due to economic hardship (while holding part or fulltime jobs) and people whose criminal behavior sustains them outside the economy. With them you are dealing with a virtual petit bourgeoisie leading up to lumpenbourgeois when you are talking about pimps and high-level drug barons. I make the same argument about their revolutionary potential as I would with the "real" petit bourgeoisie.

Being criminal as a lifestyle is not "work." It is predation upon working people just like, you guessed it, capitalists.

As the book 'freakonomics' points out in the chapter "why do most drug dealers still live with their parents" the "high level drug barons" accounts for about %2 of the criminal population. Wanna address the other 98%?

"Being criminal as a lifestyle is not "work." It is predation upon working people just like, you guessed it, capitalists"

Really? Just like wal-mart workers are 'predaters' who sell products made by exploited 3rd world workers?
Do you drink coffee to help you work? Then you are a predater -average coffee bean picker lives to 28 yes old. Terrible drug caffine.
Every person in the capitalist system is involved in being a predater.
AGAIN : what do YOU do? Make your own cloths? Grow your own food? You fuck'n better, else your a right-wing hypocrite who activley exploits the people who do which breaks up their community and forces them into horrible labor, wreaks ebviromental desstruction, and god in heaven I hope you don't drive a car, or else you are a predater upon working people who do all this shit you take advantage of just so they can survive (unless you really think they really just wanna destroy communites and be predator's - ask the average wal-mart employee) just like, you guessed it, capitalists you slimy liberal.

[khad]

Really? Just like wal-mart workers are 'predaters' who sell products made by exploited 3rd world workers?

Do you drink coffee to help you work? Then you are a predater -average coffee bean picker lives to 28 yes old. Terrible drug caffine.
Every person in the capitalist system is involved in being a predater.
AGAIN : what do YOU do? Make your own cloths? Grow your own food? You fuck'n better, else your a right-wing hypocrite who activley exploits the people who do which breaks up their community and forces them into horrible labor, wreaks ebviromental desstruction, and god in heaven I hope you don't drive a car, or else you are a predater upon working people who do all this shit you take advantage of just so they can survive (unless you really think they really just wanna destroy communites and be predator's - ask the average wal-mart employee) just like, you guessed it, capitalists you slimy liberal.

Just look at the utterly sloppy class analysis here. Wal-mart workers who pass goods made with exploited labor do NOT control the means of production. A guy who sustains himself dealing drugs, exploiting women for prostitution, or robbing houses, on the other hand, does. He or she directly expropriates from the exploited and is by any measure a capitalist. Sorry to wreck your illusions, but your analogy does not work (pun intended).

[spiltteeth]

Just look at the utterly sloppy class analysis here. Wal-mart workers who pass goods made with exploited labor do NOT control the means of production. A guy who sustains himself dealing drugs, exploiting women for prostitution, or robbing houses, on the other hand, does. He or she directly expropriates from the exploited and is by any measure a capitalist. Sorry to wreck your illusions, but your analogy does not work (pun intended).

Brilliant class analysis. The drug dealers first create their own societal status, then they situate themselves in the lowest economic sector with the least opportunity, then they create the cultural conditions that victimize them, then they socialize themselves outside the ruling calss ideology so they have the least "cultural capital" possible, then they create the legal system that is predjudaced against them (harrison act making weed illegal to control all them 'nigras 'n mexicans' or the disparity between laws for coke (when white people started doing it vs crack) then they fly to columbia, grow the coca or poppies, process it, package it, fly back, create a market, cut it, and, finally, reap the sweet surplus value.

Your a fucking joke.

[khad]

Brilliant class analysis. The drug dealers first create their own societal status, then they situate themselves in the lowest economic sector with the least opportunity
Just stop with your demented ravings. Do you know who constitutes many of the victims of crack and meth dealers? Fucking homeless people. Who also tend to be latino and black. Drug dealers situating themselves in the lowest economic sector with the least opportunity--give me a fucking break.

[StalinFanboy]

Then they'll be dealt with by the community in a reasonable manner, just like lumpens should.



They aren't, but it's what we have to go by until we have a Socialist revolution.
Wat?

So as anti-capitalist revolutionaries we should abide by the laws of capitalist countries? Despite the obvious fact that nearly every law in existence is in existence to control, beat down, and dehumanize poor people?

Are you high?

[gorillafuck]

Lumpens are those who don't work (and leech off the welfare system, reducing the quality for those who actually need it) and/or commit crimes and cause more harm than good to society. Hopefully society will just ignore them after the revolution, causing them to eventually go away.
You do know you eventually stop getting welfare checks, right? Nobody actually sustains themselves by receiving welfare.

[LOLseph Stalin]

Wat?

So as anti-capitalist revolutionaries we should abide by the laws of capitalist countries? Despite the obvious fact that nearly every law in existence is in existence to control, beat down, and dehumanize poor people?

Are you high?

I never said the Capitalist laws were good or fair. In fact, I absolutely despise most of them. However, I personally choose to still follow them because I don't want to end up in prison or something. Really the most we can do is try to organize hoping to get some of these shitty laws changed. Of course, the bourgeosie still have all the power so will still want laws that appeal to them. We'll need to wait until after the revolution to completely restructure society which I would really love to do since Capitalist laws have never done the working class any good.

[LOLseph Stalin]

You do know you eventually stop getting welfare checks, right?

And yes, I do know that. It's bullshit though. there's some people who can't work for whatever reason(they may be disabled or something) who are denied an income as a result. My mom is a perfect example.

[StalinFanboy]

I never said the Capitalist laws were good or fair. In fact, I absolutely despise most of them. However, I still follow them because I don't want to end up in prison or something. Really the most we can do is try to organize hoping to get some of these shitty laws changed. Of course, the bourgeosie still have all the power so will still want laws that appeal to them. We'll need to wait until after the revolution to completely restructure society which I would really love to do since Capitalist laws have never done the working class any good.
You said we should use them as a determining factor for what is good or bad (Prole = good, law abiding citizen; Lumpen = Law breaking asshole). Personally, I find this attitude to be extremely reactionary.

Have you ever been so poor that stealing was one of the only ways you could get food, and still have money for rent? Shit man, I guess my entire crew is lumpen.

[spiltteeth]

Just stop with your demented ravings. Do you know who constitutes many of the victims of crack and meth dealers? Fucking homeless people. Who also tend to be latino and black. Drug dealers situating themselves in the lowest economic sector with the least opportunity--give me a fucking break.


So its complete coincidence 89% of people in jail come from low income neighborhoods? Is this Glenn beck talking? Hannity?
What happened to class analysis? You do know what 'lower class' means...?
Also, most people who USE drugs are middle class and white, most people who GO TO JAIL for drugs are lower class and black (%75 of the prison pop)

Your obviously a right wing libertarian.
You don't like to use "facts" or "statistics" or "analysis" or considerations of "class" in your class analysis do you?

your just some lonely sheltered middle class republican idiot watching the masses from out your middle class home and getting his info from 'Hannity's America'.
Until you answer my critique of your *cough cough* class analysis or what you do for a living then i repeat:
your a fucking joke.

[khad]

You said we should use them as a determining factor for what is good or bad (Prole = good, law abiding citizen; Lumpen = Law breaking asshole). Personally, I find this attitude to be extremely reactionary.

Have you ever been so poor that stealing was one of the only ways you could get food, and still have money for rent? Shit man, I guess my entire crew is lumpen.
Not necessarily. I don't have a problem with people stealing from the rich. However when their victims are other oppressed people, then they become part of the oppressor class. This was the thrust behind Marx's critique of the lumpenproletariat, which the bourgeoisie used to marginalize and in many cases smash up workers' movements.

[LOLseph Stalin]

You said we should use them as a determining factor for what is good or bad (Prole = good, law abiding citizen; Lumpen = Law breaking asshole). Personally, I find this attitude to be extremely reactionary.

Have you ever been so poor that stealing was one of the only ways you could get food, and still have money for rent? Shit man, I guess my entire crew is lumpen.

I never said they should be a determining factor between what's good and bad, and if you got that impression it may have been a misunderstanding. And no, if people have to steal to get food they have my sympathies(especially if they're stealing from the oppressors). I just don't support breaking the Capitalist laws unless it's absolutely necessary for survival so please, think and allow me to tell my side before you go calling me a reactionary.

[StalinFanboy]

I never said they should be a determining factor between what's good and bad, and if you got that impression it may have been a misunderstanding. And no, if people have to steal to get food they have my sympathies(especially if they're stealing from the oppressors). I just don't support breaking the Capitalist laws unless it's absolutely necessary for survival so please, think and allow me to tell my side before you go calling me a reactionary.
Then don't make reactionary posts about capitalist laws being guide lines. That's absolute bullshit.

And while I understand that some drug dealers, pimps, etc. damage their communities, I think the conditions that force them to do these things in order to get money (Not sure if you're aware of this, but people don't like to live in the hood and be poor. They take drastic measure in order to ensure that they and their families have money. My friends mom sells prescription drugs in order to help pay rent.) make a lot of lumpen potential comrades. You seem to be acting like they have these choices in life, and they just choose the worst ones. Not only is this wrong, but it's capitalist propaganda. It's not like they could have gone to school and gotten a well paying job, but instead chose to sell crack. They are forced into these roles by capitalism, and racism in our society.

[LOLseph Stalin]

Then don't make reactionary posts about capitalist laws being guide lines. That's absolute bullshit.

And while I understand that some drug dealers, pimps, etc. damage their communities, I think the conditions that force them to do these things in order to get money (Not sure if you're aware of this, but people don't like to live in the hood and be poor. They take drastic measure in order to ensure that they and their families have money. My friends mom sells prescription drugs in order to help pay rent.) make a lot of lumpen potential comrades. You seem to be acting like they have these choices in life, and they just choose the worst ones. Not only is this wrong, but it's capitalist propaganda. It's not like they could have gone to school and gotten a well paying job, but instead chose to sell crack. They are forced into these roles by capitalism, and racism in our society.

Nobody ever said they were choosing to do what they were doing. People who are unable to get a job due to the Capitalist system need to make money somehow. Thieves for example, can steal from the bourgeois oppressors if they need money, food, etc. However, if they begin stealing from other proletarians that when people like this become a problem. When I said these people should be punished I was using the assumption that they were doing these things to other proletarians.

[khad]

So its complete coincidence 89% of people in jail come from low income neighborhoods? Is this Glenn beck talking? Hannity?
What happened to class analysis? You do know what 'lower class' means...?
Also, most people who USE drugs are middle class and white, most people who GO TO JAIL for drugs are lower class and black (%75 of the prison pop)

Your obviously a right wing libertarian.
You don't like to use "facts" or "statistics" or "analysis" or considerations of "class" in your class analysis do you?

your just some lonely sheltered middle class republican idiot watching the masses from out your middle class home and getting his info from 'Hannity's America'.
Until you answer my critique of your *cough cough* class analysis or what you do for a living then i repeat:
your a fucking joke.

Did I ever say I was against marijuana? That stuff is more or less harmless unless taken in massive doses.

In case you have never lived in a real inner city, the kinds of drugs that ruin lives and destroy communities are crystal meth and crack, and they are taken by the poorest and most exploited people in this society, all the way down to the homeless.

But even that is beside the point. The fact that you are using "lower class" shows your inability to process even the most basic facts about class relations. The entire idea of a lower class is a liberal-libertarian rhetoric that obscures people's relation to the means of production. A worker and a
thief/drug dealer who make the same income might be classified as lower class, but their relationship to the economic structure is fundamentally different, as one does wage labor and the other controls capital. One is working class, and the other is not.


You seem to be acting like they have these choices in life, and they just choose the worst ones. Not only is this wrong, but it's capitalist propaganda. It's not like they could have gone to school and gotten a well paying job, but instead chose to sell crack. They are forced into these roles by capitalism, and racism in our society.
No, I just see it as a tragic result of their class position. Engels certainly didn't make the free choice argument when he talked about the lazzaroni smashing up the militia and workers' barricades in the Neapolitan uprising. It was their class role as a convenient guard for the ruling class.

[StalinFanboy]

Nobody ever said they were choosing to do what they were doing. People who are unable to get a job due to the Capitalist system need to make money somehow. Thieves for example, can steal from the bourgeois oppressors if they need money, food, etc. However, if they begin stealing from other proletarians that when people like this become a problem. When I said these people should be punished I was using the assumption that they were doing these things to other proletarians.
If you understand they have little or no choice, then why are you condemning them? I'm entirely against broke on broke crime (By the way, Modesto Anarcho has some sexy new stickers about this.), and I would love for more people to start stealing from those who create our conditions, but instead of outright condemning them, we should be helping them as comrades.

[LOLseph Stalin]

If you understand they have little or no choice, then why are you condemning them? I'm entirely against broke on broke crime (By the way, Modesto Anarcho has some sexy new stickers about this.), and I would love for more people to start stealing from those who create our conditions, but instead of outright condemning them, we should be helping them as comrades.

I fully agree. We should be helping these people in every way we can because unfortunately the bourgeoisie won't help them. The bourgeoisie will label them as criminals when really they're the real criminals to be oppressing people in the first place. Also, I was condemning these people who act against other proletarians, not the ones who act against the bourgeoisie. People who are already oppressed shouldn't be oppressed by other oppressed people too.

[Pogue]

In fairness I share that sentiment 100%. Anyone who steals from the poor is scum in my opinion and such a thing cannot be excused. It can be explained but not excused.

[spiltteeth]

Did I ever say I was against marijuana? That stuff is more or less harmless unless taken in massive doses.

In case you have never lived in a real inner city, the kinds of drugs that ruin lives and destroy communities are crystal meth and crack, and they are taken by the poorest and most exploited people in this society, all the way down to the homeless.

But even that is beside the point. The fact that you are using "lower class" shows your inability to process even the most basic facts about class relations. The entire idea of a lower class is a liberal-libertarian rhetoric that obscures people's relation to the means of production. A worker and a
thief/drug dealer who make the same income might be classified as lower class, but their relationship to the economic structure is fundamentally different, as one does wage labor and the other controls capital. One is working class, and the other is not.


No, I just see it as a tragic result of their class position. Engels certainly didn't make the free choice argument when he talked about the lazzaroni smashing up the militia and workers' barricades in the Neapolitan uprising. It was their class role as a convenient guard for the ruling class.


I didn't mention marijuana.
I previously stated it - twice - but I'll put it a different way.
OK - means of production. So the crack dealer grows the coca in Columbia right? And he transports it to another country in mass quantity right? etc etc
These ARE the working class because none of that is true, as I said before, and as it has been analyzed in 'Freakanomics', you are talking about the top %2 of the drug barons who control the means of production.

And to you and Pouge, in case YOU never been in an inner city, many of these guys live their entire lives within a couple of blocks. I used to deal with mafioso's in Staten that had NEVER been to upper Manhattan. This may shock you - but many have no choice but to rob from their "fellow proletariat" (and thats such a preachy liberal bull shit way to put it -those 'fellows' they should love and hug are also stuck in the same situation and have had to rob and murder them, solidarity exists within their own groups and gangs and they do not rob from their own gang)

Where the hell do you get your bourgouis world view - sesame street or Fox news?!

[Pogue]

I didn't mention marijuana.
I previously stated it - twice - but I'll put it a different way.
OK - means of production. So the crack dealer grows the coca in Columbia right? And he transports it to another country in mass quantity right? etc etc
These ARE the working class because none of that is true, as I said before, and as it has been analyzed in 'Freakanomics', you are talking about the top %2 of the drug barons who control the means of production.

And to you and Pouge, in case YOU never been in an inner city, many of these guys live their entire lives within a couple of blocks. I used to deal with mafioso's in Staten that had NEVER been to upper Manhattan. This may shock you - but many have no choice but to rob from their "fellow proletariat" (and thats such a preachy liberal bull shit way to put it -those 'fellows' they should love and hug are also stuck in the same situation and have had to rob and murder them, solidarity exists within their own groups and gangs and they do not rob from their own gang)

Where the hell do you get your bourgouis world view - sesame street or Fox news?!

Once more, robbing from your fellow poor is a disgusting aind unjustifiable act, and the person doing it is scum and a class traitor.

[spiltteeth]

Once more, robbing from your fellow poor is a disgusting aind unjustifiable act, and the person doing it is scum and a class traitor.

So you wouldn't rob from someone who threatens to kill you and your family, is in direct competition for the very limited resources in the area, maybe sold drugs and got one of your family members hooked, maybe even killed one of your relatives -
AND your desperate AND your family needs to eat AND you were brought up in a culture that condones this behavior, Praises it in song even,
STILL, you would not steal because this person was poor.

Where do you live Pouge? I will personally bring you to the Bronx to preach this very Christian message of Love your neighbor, love your enemies.
You people are completeley realistic and not idealistic at all. Lets love people into revolutionary conciousness. Or stone them. Either way...

[Pogue]

So you wouldn't rob from someone who threatens to kill you and your family, is in direct competition for the very limited resources in the area, maybe sold drugs and got one of your family members hooked, maybe even killed one of your relatives -
AND your desperate AND your family needs to eat AND you were brought up in a culture that condones this behavior, Praises it in song even,
STILL, you would not steal because this person was poor.

Where do you live Pouge? I will personally bring you to the Bronx to preach this very Christian message of Love your neighbor, love your enemies.
You people are completeley realistic and not idealistic at all. Lets love people into revolutionary conciousness. Or stone them. Either way...

I don't understand your reaction. All I said is that its disgusting for a poor person to steal from another poor person. Its an entirely selfish decision, and the idea of them being desperate is a contradiction because they are stealing from another desperate position. I also think its an insulting myth perpetuated by the middle classes that the poor are all theives. Working class communities have historically been just that - communities. There is a long tradition of solidarity and mutual aid, and of course only the very small minority of poor people are theives. And so to steal from the poor is a disgusting act.

[spiltteeth]

I don't understand your reaction. All I said is that its disgusting for a poor person to steal from another poor person. Its an entirely selfish decision, and the idea of them being desperate is a contradiction because they are stealing from another desperate position. I also think its an insulting myth perpetuated by the middle classes that the poor are all theives. Working class communities have historically been just that - communities. There is a long tradition of solidarity and mutual aid, and of course only the very small minority of poor people are theives. And so to steal from the poor is a disgusting act.

Yes its selfish (even if its for fam)
There is no contradiction, you can still be desperate and steal from desperate people.
I'm not saying anything like working class or poor people are all thieves. I've been to prison, I've stolen from the poor (insane out of my mind on crack -and yes it haunts me) I've worked as a substance abuse prof., and I'm describing to you the general conditions of the people who steal from other desperate people that I've encountered.
I still ask you - in the same position i just described what would you do? I'll tell you - you would die, either from starvation or a bullet.
It's heartless calling these people scum.
Don't understand me? Thats the problem - don't judge these people by your your own privileged liberal idealist standard, please try to understand.

[Pogue]

Yes its selfish (even if its for fam)
There is no contradiction, you can still be desperate and steal from desperate people.
I'm not saying anything like working class or poor people are all thieves. I've been to prison, I've stolen from the poor (insane out of my mind on crack -and yes it haunts me) I've worked as a substance abuse prof., and I'm describing to you the general conditions of the people who steal from other desperate people that I've encountered.
I still ask you - in the same position i just described what would you do? I'll tell you - you would die, either from starvation or a bullet.
It's heartless calling these people scum.
Don't understand me? Thats the problem - don't judge these people by your your own privileged liberal idealist standard, please try to understand.

Since when was it a priviliged liberal idealist thing to oppose people stealing from the poor? It makes no sense, quite simply, especially not from a working class perspective. If you are poor and starving, how can you justify stealing from another poor and starving person? Your making the life of a poor and starving person worse off for your own benefit. That makes you scum in my eyes - you value yourself over other people in the same situation. My very working class values taught me you don't push someone elses face into the dirt to get yourself out. Such ideas have no place in working class communities.

Please do not call me priviliged. I detest such an insult which has no correlation to the reality of the life I live.

[khad]

I didn't mention marijuana.
I previously stated it - twice - but I'll put it a different way.
OK - means of production. So the crack dealer grows the coca in Columbia right? And he transports it to another country in mass quantity right? etc etc
These ARE the working class because none of that is true, as I said before, and as it has been analyzed in 'Freakanomics', you are talking about the top %2 of the drug barons who control the means of production.
Wal-Mart doesn't directly produce most of its merchandise--yet it is fully capitalist. Drug dealers don't produce the drugs themselves, but they OWN the drugs they sell (don't even try to compare them to service workers).

All this shows is that you have no idea how to analyze class or capitalism. You ought to be restricted for your anti-worker views.

[spiltteeth]

Since when was it a priviliged liberal idealist thing to oppose people stealing from the poor? It makes no sense, quite simply, especially not from a working class perspective. If you are poor and starving, how can you justify stealing from another poor and starving person? Your making the life of a poor and starving person worse off for your own benefit. That makes you scum in my eyes - you value yourself over other people in the same situation. My very working class values taught me you don't push someone elses face into the dirt to get yourself out. Such ideas have no place in working class communities.

Please do not call me priviliged. I detest such an insult which has no correlation to the reality of the life I live.


I mean 'liberal' because it does not take into account all the factors I've mentioned. Liberal as in simplistic, naive, black and white, ideal, things I've seen others accuse you of too.
Your working class values!? THATS my whole point - many of these people are brought up with anti-worker values - a liberal would not ask why that is but I will tell you why -it is a specific kind of behavior that evolved for specific sociological reasons that has an effect on their psychology.
AGAIN POUGE -with the condition I laid out above -and remember your never been exposed to 'working class values' because such values would not function in your community if only individually maintained - would you steal from the above described poor person.
PS If you are not able to understand their position it is because you are in a privileged position, just like my position is relatively privileged to a person I once counseled, living in Egypt and poor, who did terrible immoral sexual things to eat that day - its beyond me.

[spiltteeth]

Wal-Mart doesn't directly produce most of its merchandise--yet it is fully capitalist. Drug dealers don't produce the drugs themselves, but they OWN the drugs they sell (don't even try to compare them to service workers).

All this shows is that you have no idea how to analyze class or capitalism. You ought to be restricted for your anti-worker views.

Where are my views anti-worker? Please point this out.
Ok. The people do not own the means to production of drugs (except for the tiny minority that grow their own weed)
In fact they do not own the drugs at all. This will be good for you, you'll learn.
I was in prison for selling cocaine, LSD, and weed.
I would get the weed and coke 'fronted' to me, after building up a relationship with the mafioso's in Staten. That means I'd only have part of the money, the rest I'd get from the selling. Then I myself would 'front' a few ounces, getting only part of the money up front (sometimes most of it, sometimes none of it.) And so on.
Think this is unique? ASK ANY BLOOD OR CRIP.

Don't believe me and don't want to go and read actual books with hard words and scary numbers? No problem. I will quote well known economist
Steven Levitt- the Alvin H. Baum Professor of Economics at the University of Chicago, where he is also director of The Becker Center on Chicago Price Theory. In 2004, he was awarded the John Bates Clark Medal, which recognizes the most influential economist in America under the age of 40. More recently, he was named one of Time magazine's "100 People Who Shape Our World." Levitt received his B.A. from Harvard University in 1989, his Ph.D. from M.I.T. in 1994, and has taught at Chicago since 1997.
and


"a crack gang works pretty much like the standard capitalist enterprise: you have to be near the top of the pyramid to make a big wage. Notwithstanding the leadership's rhetoric about the family nature of the business, the gang's wages are about as skewed as wages in corporate America. A foot soldier had plenty in common with a McDonald's burger flipper or a Wal-Mart shelf stocker. In fact, most of J. T.'s foot soldiers also held minimum-wage jobs in the legitimate sector to supplement their skimpy illicit earnings. The leader of another crack gang once told Venkatesh that he could easily afford to pay his foot soldiers more, but it wouldn't be prudent. "You got all these niggers below you who want your job, you dig?" he said. "So, you know, you try to take care of them, but you know, you also have to show them you the boss. You always have to get yours first, or else you really ain't no leader. If you start taking losses, they see you as weak and shit."

Along with the bad pay, the foot soldiers faced terrible job conditions. For starters, they had to stand on a street corner all day and do business with crackheads. (The gang members were strongly advised against using the product themselves, advice that was enforced by beatings if necessary.) Foot soldiers also risked arrest and, more worrisome, violence. Using the gang's financial documents and the rest of Venkatesh's research, it is possible to construct an adverse-events index of J. T.'s gang during the four years in question. The results are astonishingly bleak. If you were a member of J. T.'s gang for all four years, here is the typical fate you would have faced during that period:

Number of times arrested 5.9
Number of nonfatal wounds or injuries 2.4 (not including injuries meted out by the gang itself for rules violations)
Chance of being killed 1 in 4
A 1-in-4 chance of being killed! Compare these odds to being a timber cutter, which the Bureau of Labor Statistics calls the most dangerous job in the United States. Over four years' time, a timber cutter would stand only a 1-in-200 chance of being killed. Or compare the crack dealer's odds to those of a death row inmate in Texas, which executes more prisoners than any other state. In 2003, Texas put to death twenty-four inmates—or just 5 percent of the nearly 500 inmates on its death row during that time. Which means that you stand a greater chance of dying while dealing crack in a Chicago housing project than you do while sitting on death row in Texas. So if crack dealing is the most dangerous job in America, and if the salary is only $3.30 an hour, why on earth would anyone take such a job?"

I'm sick of your clownish answers. If you respond -do it with facts and economic figures. Too much bullshit makes me sleepy.

[khad]

Where are my views anti-worker? Please point this out.
Ok. The people do not own the means to production of drugs (except for the tiny minority that grow their own weed)
In fact they do not own the drugs at all. This will be good for you, you'll learn.
I was in prison for selling cocaine, LSD, and weed.
I would get the weed and coke 'fronted' to me, after building up a relationship with the mafioso's in Staten. That means I'd only have part of the money, the rest I'd get from the selling. Then I myself would 'front' a few ounces, getting only part of the money up front (sometimes most of it, sometimes none of it.) And so on.
Think this is unique? ASK ANY BLOOD OR CRIP.
This just proves your lumpenprole tendencies. You know what this sounds like? Small shops which rely on credit to stock their merchandise. Congratulations, petit bourgeois.

Don't talk about fucking class, you exploiter dog.

[makesi]

So you wouldn't rob from someone who threatens to kill you and your family, is in direct competition for the very limited resources in the area, maybe sold drugs and got one of your family members hooked, maybe even killed one of your relatives -
AND your desperate AND your family needs to eat AND you were brought up in a culture that condones this behavior, Praises it in song even,
STILL, you would not steal because this person was poor.

Where do you live Pouge? I will personally bring you to the Bronx to preach this very Christian message of Love your neighbor, love your enemies.
You people are completeley realistic and not idealistic at all. Lets love people into revolutionary conciousness. Or stone them. Either way...

The African-American community is the most religiously devout community in the United States. That community has lots of charitable activities, community involvement programs, etc. They don't just spend all their time stealing from the offering plate and listening to Mobb Deep. Your assertion is more than just a gross exaggeration it's disgusting and rightwing.

The hoodlums who come out at night in those communities might believe in the horseshit you say, but the normal people who are out working on their cars during the day, watching their kids run around and play, working on their yard, etc. do not.

You sound exactly like a typical petty-bourgeoise small businessman. I dont know why you expect citing a neoliberal, Chicago school, rational choice economist like Leavitt is going to charm people on this list. Since you like Leavitt so much--and even took the time to copy the blurb out about him on the back of his book word for word--I'd be interested to know what you think of his typical, rational choice, just look at the numbers approach he takes in his analysis of the relation between abortion and crime rates. The higher the number of abortions in poor communities, the lower the crime rate. When critics pointed out the gaping holes and unstated (and vehemently racist and reactionary) assumptions in his argument Leavitt maintained that he was simply showing the correlation and the numbers, not making any claims and certainly not saying anything deliberately racist.

The dealers I've met lived pretty leisurely lives, yes, they weren't getting rich but the money they earned from selling was much more easily earned than running around at a service job. They spent most of their time waiting at their place for customers or driving around in their car to customers. The psychological aspects of the job, like the fear they may have felt whenever seeing a cop in the rearview mirror, etc may be stressful but the job was hardly hard labor.


No one wants to love you into having a revolutionary consciousness, pal. We've got different plans for dealing with people like you, they're short and to the point and right to the brain stem.

[spiltteeth]

This just proves your lumpenprole tendencies. You know what this sounds like? Small shops which rely on credit to stock their merchandise. Congratulations, petit bourgeois.

Don't talk about fucking class, you exploiter dog.

Aren't you going to reply with statistics? What about the economists quote?

"You know what this sounds like? Small shops which rely on credit to stock their merchandise. Congratulations, petit bourgeois."

HOLY SHIT THATS MY WHOLE POINT !!!!
It IS CAPITALISM! THEY ARE WORKERS!

Oh, and how was I being anti-worker. You haven't answered ANY thing. have you?

oh, and don't revs believe in change? I know Marxists do. They believe a different society will produce a different consciousness and a different man.

Next month I have 7 years sobriety. I was a substance abuse counselor until I got laid off and I worked hard with these people.
Now I'm a fish butcher but I still volunteer at jails, help convicts get jobs and education. I just tonight came from a hospital where a man I never met before wanted to talk to someone about his alcoholism.
Was I a 'petit bourgeois'? Yes, thats my whole point. I have massive guilt and shame over my previous life, but I believe people can change, and I try to use my experience to help others like the many people who did and do help me everyday.
Instead of judging people I try to help them. I know I've been an asshole on this thread and you deserve an apology - I'm sorry. It's just that the topic touched on some sensitive things with me and also nearly everyday I work with guys -murderers, thieves, dealers etc- who are trying to change. They are my friends and they saved my life.
I hope you accept my apology.

[khad]

You sound exactly like a typical petty-bourgeoise small businessman. I dont know why you expect citing a neoliberal, Chicago school, rational choice economist like Leavitt is going to charm people on this list. Since you like Leavitt so much--and even took the time to copy the blurb out about him on the back of his book word for word--I'd be interested to know what you think of his typical, rational choice, just look at the numbers approach he takes in his analysis of the relation between abortion and crime rates. The higher the number of abortions in poor communities, the lower the crime rate. When critics pointed out the gaping holes and unstated (and vehemently racist and reactionary) assumptions in his argument Leavitt maintained that he was simply showing the correlation and the numbers, not making any claims and certainly not saying anything deliberately racist.
He should show his devotion to his friend Leavitt by retroactively aborting himself.

[FreeFocus]

Retail workers are proletarians, most of them work hard as hell and many have to take another job just to support themselves.

Moreover, just to comment on the current topic in this thread, drug pushers, thieves and pimps will get no support from me. I don't support their unethical activities and don't view their behavior as helpful for the working class. If a fucker broke into my house to steal from me, I don't give a shit what their situation was, they're getting their ass handed to them. Stealing from the poor isn't justified. Neither is pimping innocent women in the sex trade. Or getting a community's youth addicted to drugs and sending the community into a bottomless pit of gang violence and the like.

That's not to say I want to run a physical program of extermination against them (well, maybe against pimps), it'd be great to simply have people see the error of their ways. Sometimes this isn't possible, or it's not timely, and communities and people simply have to defend themselves.

[spiltteeth]

The African-American community is the most religiously devout community in the United States. That community has lots of charitable activities, community involvement programs, etc. They don't just spend all their time stealing from the offering plate and listening to Mobb Deep. Your assertion is more than just a gross exaggeration it's disgusting and rightwing.

The hoodlums who come out at night in those communities might believe in the horseshit you say, but the normal people who are out working on their cars during the day, watching their kids run around and play, working on their yard, etc. do not.

You sound exactly like a typical petty-bourgeoise small businessman. I dont know why you expect citing a neoliberal, Chicago school, rational choice economist like Leavitt is going to charm people on this list. Since you like Leavitt so much--and even took the time to copy the blurb out about him on the back of his book word for word--I'd be interested to know what you think of his typical, rational choice, just look at the numbers approach he takes in his analysis of the relation between abortion and crime rates. The higher the number of abortions in poor communities, the lower the crime rate. When critics pointed out the gaping holes and unstated (and vehemently racist and reactionary) assumptions in his argument Leavitt maintained that he was simply showing the correlation and the numbers, not making any claims and certainly not saying anything deliberately racist.

The dealers I've met lived pretty leisurely lives, yes, they weren't getting rich but the money they earned from selling was much more easily earned than running around at a service job. They spent most of their time waiting at their place for customers or driving around in their car to customers. The psychological aspects of the job, like the fear they may have felt whenever seeing a cop in the rearview mirror, etc may be stressful but the job was hardly hard labor.


No one wants to love you into having a revolutionary consciousness, pal. We've got different plans for dealing with people like you, they're short and to the point and right to the brain stem.


I actually don't understand anything you say. My point wasn't that dealing is hard labor, simply that they did not own the means of production. Those "hoodlums" (really? hoodlums? sigh) who aren't "normal" according to you because "normal" people are working are the people I'm trying to explain in more rounded terms. I actually hate the Chicago school and Levitt does seem a bit racist to me at times, but his economic analysis of drug dealing has been studied and reproduced many times. If somethings true and solid, I don't care if George W Bush believes it too. David Harvey, a Marxist geographer, has also produced similar stuff, I just couldn't find a quote handy. If you have ant data that contradicts it please post it.
As far as "numbers approach he takes in his analysis of the relation between abortion and crime rates." I haven't a clue. Sorry.

"That community has lots of charitable activities, community involvement programs, etc. "

Yea. I know. I'm very involved in them - through state agencies and the church. However, many of the communities "hoodlums" only fathers are mobb deep, and they consciously try to imitate them. I'm in the church and a member of "the God Squad" as the 'Hoodlums' call it. To be apart of my group means total social isolation from most of the community.
I'm afraid I don't see people as "normal" or "abnormal," I am simply presenting the sociological conditions that relate to criminal behavior.
AGAIN - the how do you explain that most of America is not black -yet most of the jails are. Most people in jail -criminals - come from low income neighborhoods. Now, is it not reasonable to make a connection between poverty and crime? Or is it genetic. The prison pop is %75 poor black men because black people have a crime gene?
This is the opposite of right wing, "its all these peoples fault, don't talk about circumstances, why 'normal people' still work and have cars (!) these people arer scum and hoodlums we should shoot them!!" your line is almost VERBATIM Rush Limbaugh.
Odd boy you.

[spiltteeth]

He should show his devotion to his friend Leavitt by retroactively aborting himself.

I don;t personally know Levitt. He's not my friend. This is exactly what Fox news and Sarah Palin did - "Obama is freinds with Bill Aires!"
I though people were leftists here.

NOONE here is for changeing people? Just shooting them.
Ok. Reasonable.
I like my method better. BTW

[FreeFocus]

splitteeth, the incarceration rates in African-American communities are due to three factors: the legal system's class bias as a state system (the main target of the law is always the working class/poor), institutional racism in terms of the nature of the institution of police, and sociological realities prevalent in the communities brought about by centuries of cultural oppression/destruction, historical trauma, etc. I don't think anyone disagrees with you about the sociological realities, no one is positing that people of African descent have a "crime gene." We're communists. We understand that the state and its organs are instruments of oppression.

I think these past few pages have been a misunderstanding. splitteeth got a little emotional, which is understandable, given his past he's shared with us. Everyone should just cool down. He's taking an approach of not putting a bullet in the head of every working class person who struggles the wrong way. That's legitimate. Not every thief should face a firing squad. Not all criminals are irredeemable. Surely their actions are reprehensible and unacceptable, but community solidarity and organizing can go a long way in sorting stuff like this out and building stronger communities. Nonetheless, people who run drug cartels, thievery rings and brothels are still scum, and yes, they do leech off of and poison communities.

And by the way, stop ragging on Mobb Deep. Their shit is sick. :cool:

[spiltteeth]

Retail workers are proletarians, most of them work hard as hell and many have to take another job just to support themselves.

Moreover, just to comment on the current topic in this thread, drug pushers, thieves and pimps will get no support from me. I don't support their unethical activities and don't view their behavior as helpful for the working class. If a fucker broke into my house to steal from me, I don't give a shit what their situation was, they're getting their ass handed to them. Stealing from the poor isn't justified. Neither is pimping innocent women in the sex trade. Or getting a community's youth addicted to drugs and sending the community into a bottomless pit of gang violence and the like.

That's not to say I want to run a physical program of extermination against them (well, maybe against pimps), it'd be great to simply have people see the error of their ways. Sometimes this isn't possible, or it's not timely, and communities and people simply have to defend themselves.


Just to set the record strait. not only do I not support drug dealing, pimps, thieves etc, unlike I suspect others here, I actively fight against it. Nor do I think it has any benefit to anyone -except the dealer/pimp/ etc
Still - these aren't bad people, they are human beings who do, or have done, bad things.
I KNOW - people can change. I know ex-murderer's/ dealers who are now some of the most honest, most couragest, most beautiful people I've ever met. I've seen them save lives.
And some of you would shoot them!?
Is this a fucking cartoon to you people?
Ever killed a man? I haven't, you people who see these people as monsters, scum, and hoodlums, and there are some and maybe even many, try to see the humanity inside.
I think I'm done with rev left.
I don't want killers, I want comrades.

[makesi]

I actually don't understand anything you say. My point wasn't that dealing is hard labor, simply that they did not own the means of production. Those "hoodlums" (really? hoodlums? sigh) who aren't "normal" according to you because "normal" people are working are the people I'm trying to explain in more rounded terms. I actually hate the Chicago school and Levitt does seem a bit racist to me at times, but his economic analysis of drug dealing has been studied and reproduced many times. If somethings true and solid, I don't care if George W Bush believes it too. David Harvey, a Marxist geographer, has also produced similar stuff, I just couldn't find a quote handy. If you have ant data that contradicts it please post it.
As far as "numbers approach he takes in his analysis of the relation between abortion and crime rates." I haven't a clue. Sorry.

"That community has lots of charitable activities, community involvement programs, etc. "

Yea. I know. I'm very involved in them - through state agencies and the church. However, many of the communities "hoodlums" only fathers are mobb deep, and they consciously try to imitate them. I'm in the church and a member of "the God Squad" as the 'Hoodlums' call it. To be apart of my group means total social isolation from most of the community.
I'm afraid I don't see people as "normal" or "abnormal," I am simply presenting the sociological conditions that relate to criminal behavior.
AGAIN - the how do you explain that most of America is not black -yet most of the jails are. Most people in jail -criminals - come from low income neighborhoods. Now, is it not reasonable to make a connection between poverty and crime? Or is it genetic. The prison pop is %75 poor black men because black people have a crime gene?
This is the opposite of right wing, "its all these peoples fault, don't talk about circumstances, why 'normal people' still work and have cars (!) these people arer scum and hoodlums we should shoot them!!" your line is almost VERBATIM Rush Limbaugh.
Odd boy you.


I have no problem with explaining and analyzing the relation between crime and poverty by looking at the wider society and capitalism. I think the proportion of blacks in prisons is definitely explained by capitalism and racism, but you're argument, as Im reading it, is centered more around embellishing the positive and redeeming qualities of street dealers. The things that I wrote don't necessitate a rightwing defense of US incarceration statistics on my behalf.

Not to be offensive but your post seems to contain some contradictions in it and it seems to me be they may be colored by your misperceptions. You note that you are involved in a number of community activities and that you work several jobs (I wouldnt doubt that you work hard) and are involved in your church and were involved with counseling but then you state your being involved with the church "means total social isolation from most of the community." Perhaps you are isolated from the dealing and underground community but it sounds to me like you are quite involved with the wider community.

When I've spoken with drug dealers about politics I found them to actually be quite conservative and pro-capitalist in their views. And I didn't argue with those guys too much, precisely because they were real hoodlums; I didnt know exactly how they'd react to having their worldviews trashed.
They didn't have any illusions about themselves working for profit and making money and they reminded me more of the Chinese dealer in King of New York than Frank White (perhaps youve seen the movie?).

[makesi]

I dont mind Fox News' tactics they seem pretty effective to me. The US left could learn something from them.

[makesi]

splitteeth, the incarceration rates in African-American communities are due to three factors: the legal system's class bias as a state system (the main target of the law is always the working class/poor), institutional racism in terms of the nature of the institution of police, and sociological realities prevalent in the communities brought about by centuries of cultural oppression/destruction, historical trauma, etc. I don't think anyone disagrees with you about the sociological realities, no one is positing that people of African descent have a "crime gene." We're communists. We understand that the state and its organs are instruments of oppression.

I think these past few pages have been a misunderstanding. splitteeth got a little emotional, which is understandable, given his past he's shared with us. Everyone should just cool down. He's taking an approach of not putting a bullet in the head of every working class person who struggles the wrong way. That's legitimate. Not every thief should face a firing squad. Not all criminals are irredeemable. Surely their actions are reprehensible and unacceptable, but community solidarity and organizing can go a long way in sorting stuff like this out and building stronger communities. Nonetheless, people who run drug cartels, thievery rings and brothels are still scum, and yes, they do leech off of and poison communities.

And by the way, stop ragging on Mobb Deep. Their shit is sick. :cool:


I like Mobb Deep's music a lot.

[StalinFanboy]

I dont mind Fox News' tactics they seem pretty effective to me. The US left could learn something from them.
Lying and bending the truth?

[makesi]

Lying and bending the truth?


Whatever it takes.

[apawllo]

Just to set the record strait. not only do I not support drug dealing, pimps, thieves etc, unlike I suspect others here, I actively fight against it. Nor do I think it has any benefit to anyone -except the dealer/pimp/ etc
Still - these aren't bad people, they are human beings who do, or have done, bad things.
I KNOW - people can change. I know ex-murderer's/ dealers who are now some of the most honest, most couragest, most beautiful people I've ever met. I've seen them save lives.
And some of you would shoot them!?
Is this a fucking cartoon to you people?
Ever killed a man? I haven't, you people who see these people as monsters, scum, and hoodlums, and there are some and maybe even many, try to see the humanity inside.
I think I'm done with rev left.
I don't want killers, I want comrades.

I see where you're coming from completely. People can't be expected to educate themselves in order to comprehend the evils of capitalist society while they're providing for themselves, possibly a family, and living in project housing or something of the like. Some manage to do so obviously, but not many.

There was a point made a couple pages back and discussed briefly. One which I thought was important within the scope of this debate. That being the fact that one can't judge another's actions within a capitalist society and clearly analyze and comprehend said actions in the mindset of a leftist revolutionary, but must do so rather in the mindframe of a member of this capitalist society. We have to remember basic Marx theory of alienation. The proletariat not only has no control of the work opportunities presented, but has also long been dehumanized.

Within capitalist society, Marx would likely argue, that drug dealers, pimps, etc. are behaving as one could expect they would if placed in such a situation. I agree that it would make everyone's life much simpler if drug dealers played the role of Peter Pan in capitalist society, but that just isn't realistic. The important thing for us all to remember is that the system is what causes all of this, not the people within it.

[FreeFocus]

Within capitalist society, Marx would likely argue, that drug dealers, pimps, etc. are behaving as one could expect they would if placed in such a situation. I agree that it would make everyone's life much simpler if drug dealers played the role of Peter Pan in capitalist society, but that just isn't realistic. The important thing for us all to remember is that the system is what causes all of this, not the people within it.

Nonetheless, humans aren't clay. Billions of people have the same situation, yet we don't have billions of drug dealers. Like it or not, there is usually a small, but significant, choice factor involved.

[khad]

Within capitalist society, Marx would likely argue, that drug dealers, pimps, etc. are behaving as one could expect they would if placed in such a situation. I agree that it would make everyone's life much simpler if drug dealers played the role of Peter Pan in capitalist society, but that just isn't realistic. The important thing for us all to remember is that the system is what causes all of this, not the people within it.
Actually, Marx wrote about thieves and pimps in his formulation of the lumpenproletariat (the topic of this thread). You're right, they behave as one could expect them to behave--as the shock troops of the bourgeois state in smashing workers' movements.

[ls]

I think these past few pages have been a misunderstanding. splitteeth got a little emotional, which is understandable, given his past he's shared with us. Everyone should just cool down.

I think that it's khad who needs to cool down.

Mind you, what do we expect from an annoying guilty petit-bourgeoisie college kid who feels the need to put other people down for simply being from the west? Isn't third-worldism the least bankrupt ideology there is. :cool:

[BabylonHoruv]

Putting drug dealers in the same class as thieves here is problematic. A drug dealer is a retail worker, he does the same job I do, just his is illegal. He sells drugs, I sell drugs. I'm talking about the street level drug dealer, but I know there are a fair amount of people who sustain themselves with street level drug dealing. Thhey aren't rich, but they do support temslves.

[BabylonHoruv]

You do know you eventually stop getting welfare checks, right? Nobody actually sustains themselves by receiving welfare.


Actually, as long as you keep having kids the checks keep coming. A really miserable existence, but I do know some people who do it.

[BabylonHoruv]

Once more, robbing from your fellow poor is a disgusting aind unjustifiable act, and the person doing it is scum and a class traitor.

So wal-mart workers are scummy class traitors?

[khad]

I think that it's khad who needs to cool down.

Mind you, what do we expect from an annoying guilty petit-bourgeoisie college kid who feels the need to put other people down for simply being from the west? Isn't third-worldism the least bankrupt ideology there is. :cool:
Yep, on cue. Arrogance, condescension, check. Have a cookie, kid.


Putting drug dealers in the same class as thieves here is problematic. A drug dealer is a retail worker, he does the same job I do, just his is illegal. He sells drugs, I sell drugs. I'm talking about the street level drug dealer, but I know there are a fair amount of people who sustain themselves with street level drug dealing. Thhey aren't rich, but they do support temslves.
You don't own or stock your own merchandise. A retail worker is a retail worker. A drug dealer is a businessman.

[BabylonHoruv]

Yep, on cue. Arrogance, condescension, check. Have a cookie, kid.


You don't own or stock your own merchandise. A retail worker is a retail worker. A drug dealer is a businessman.


That'd make him petite bougoisie. Also, as Split Teeth explained a large number of drug dealers do not own their own merchandise. They simply sell it for others.

[apawllo]

Nonetheless, humans aren't clay. Billions of people have the same situation, yet we don't have billions of drug dealers. Like it or not, there is usually a small, but significant, choice factor involved.
The system is setup to victimize the proletariat. I don't know if you've ever read Angela Davis before, but the prison industrial complex is alive and a very real threat in the United States.

[khad]

That'd make him petite bougoisie. Also, as Split Teeth explained a large number of drug dealers do not own their own merchandise. They simply sell it for others.
Not exactly. You saw splitteeth describe his own situation:

"I would get the weed and coke 'fronted' to me, after building up a relationship with the mafioso's in Staten. That means I'd only have part of the money, the rest I'd get from the selling. Then I myself would 'front' a few ounces, getting only part of the money up front (sometimes most of it, sometimes none of it.) And so on."

This is pretty much an analogous process to small shops borrowing to purchase their merchandise, which they then sell as their own.

[spiltteeth]

I have no problem with explaining and analyzing the relation between crime and poverty by looking at the wider society and capitalism. I think the proportion of blacks in prisons is definitely explained by capitalism and racism, but you're argument, as Im reading it, is centered more around embellishing the positive and redeeming qualities of street dealers. The things that I wrote don't necessitate a rightwing defense of US incarceration statistics on my behalf.

Not to be offensive but your post seems to contain some contradictions in it and it seems to me be they may be colored by your misperceptions. You note that you are involved in a number of community activities and that you work several jobs (I wouldnt doubt that you work hard) and are involved in your church and were involved with counseling but then you state your being involved with the church "means total social isolation from most of the community." Perhaps you are isolated from the dealing and underground community but it sounds to me like you are quite involved with the wider community.

When I've spoken with drug dealers about politics I found them to actually be quite conservative and pro-capitalist in their views. And I didn't argue with those guys too much, precisely because they were real hoodlums; I didnt know exactly how they'd react to having their worldviews trashed.
They didn't have any illusions about themselves working for profit and making money and they reminded me more of the Chinese dealer in King of New York than Frank White (perhaps youve seen the movie?).


Your right, I did lose my cool and my views were defiantly prejudiced by my emotions. Also, its true that people aren't clay, myself and others I know who really changed were at a point of supreme despair and brokenness and in fact only a small number of people actually change. And most dealers, thieves (I was one of them -I know) are extremely capitalistic - in fact as a counselor many of the patients I saw had this one shirt with a picture of Christopher Walk en and a quote from King of NY!
Again, I do apologize. It was petty and childish of me, especially to throw out acusations of being right wing etc
My job, before I got laid off anyway, was advocating for that sometimes small and hidden piece of humanity buried in alot of predatory pride, viciousness, and rage. I don't believe you should give up on someone -even when they thieve or kill. Although not common, I've seen miraculous change from the least likely places and its hard to predict who will regain their humanity.
There is, of course, always choice, no matter how bad ones circumstances are.

[chimx]

Marx discussed the nature of non-productive laborers in volume II of Capital:


To the capitalist who has others working for him, buying and selling becomes a primary function. Since he appropriates the product of many on a large social scale, he must sell it on the same scale and then reconvert it from money into elements of production. Now as before neither the time of purchase nor of sale creates any value. The function of merchant’s capital give rise to an illusion. But without going into this at length here this much is plain from the start: If by a division of labour a function, unproductive in itself although a necessary element of reproduction, is transformed from an incidental occupation many into an exclusive occupation of a few, into their special business, the nature of this function itself is not changed. One merchant (here considered a mere agent attending to the change of form of commodities, a mere buyer and seller) may by his operations shorten the time of purchase and sale for many producers. In such case he should be regarded as a machine which reduces useless expenditure of energy or helps to set production time free.

It has been discussed here:
http://www.revleft.com/vb/service-sector-employees-t73915/index.html?t=73915

[spiltteeth]

I just wanna make 2 points.
I’m talking about people who end up in jail.
Last Monday a friend asked me to talk to guy, a criminal. His father had shot and killed his 2 brothers, his mother, and then himself. He was sexually abused by social workers and regularly did hard drugs from age 8 on. Never learned to read or write. Is he an extreme case? Yea, but really not that extreme. Over 1/3 rd of men in prison have been sexually abused –and men usually don’t like to talk about this so the real number is likely much higher. Over 2/3rd admit to major physical abuse. In America, there are more mentally ill people in jail than in mental institutions.
Now, can you imagine looking this guy in the eyes and saying ‘you have betrayed your class!’ His fellow man has tried to kill and torture him all his life. I’ve had hundreds of ex-cons tell me or a college that we were the first person EVER in their lives to act kind to them. The big kindness? Nothing much, usually just listened.
Do they have a choice? Absolutely, but what a small choice! It not just that they are poor, they are poor, abused, mentally ill, etc
I urge people to take this into consideration before calling these people scum etc.

Secondly, I still maintain class in America is not so clear cut and that the average foot soldier, drug dealer has more in common with a wal-mart worker than a business man in their actual life experience. They have little to do with price setting, they don’t own the means of production, etc
Since the drugs are usually fronted, at least in part, the money comes not only from the ‘clients’ buying, but from the ‘lender’ who, in real life experience, really functions as an employer – constantly ‘monitoring performance –(“didn’t you sell all that yet?! Where’s my money? Etc”) and directly receiving most of the surplus from the sales by setting, along with the market, the actual price. There is a huge ‘pay differential’ between the bottom foot soldier and the top drug baron, who gets most of the surplus value.

[RHIZOMES]

With the rhetoric of harnessing the lumpenproletariat, the degeneration was inevitable.

Except the New Black Panther Party members weren't even members of the original Black Panther party and are essentially a bunch of unrelated crazies who chose to name themselves the New Black Panthers when there's no organizational link between the two groups?

[ls]

Except the New Black Panther Party members weren't even members of the original Black Panther party and are essentially a bunch of unrelated crazies who chose to name themselves the New Black Panthers when there's no organizational link between the two groups?

Isn't it funny how khad sticks up for some of the most widely criticised groups on the left, then when it comes to community self-defence, denounces another group as merely being lumpenproles.

I think that the original black panther party were not perfect, but at the time a definitely progressive and hopeful organisation within an ocean of oppression; degeneration was not necessarily inevitable at all.

[pastradamus]

The Means of productions aren't confined to those who work in the developement of raw material. A product can include a service. That is to say, someone who works in the service sector is producing something which generates wealth. Take for example, stacking shelves. This is the product of a workers labour which in turn increases the owners revenue.

[Pogue]

http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/5003/herol.jpg (http://img15.imageshack.us/i/herol.jpg/)

[Janine Melnitz]

I really don't see how whether people break the law or not affects their class position.
Yeah. The incredible naivete of treating "outlaw" capitalists as somehow different from the regular kind, this is capitulation to bourgeois ideology.

I mean, Khad, for instance, you obviously understand this, but you keep qualifying your descriptions of "illegitimate" businesses, calling them "lumpen" as if it's a meaningful distinction, saying their profiteers are "virtually" or "like" (petit-)bourgeois or whatever. No, they just are -- and as in any industry, they're the minority. The drug industry, like any, is overwhelmingly composed of workers (though granted, the retail structure means a drug consumer often doesn't meet a lot of them). You might hear these workers blather about how they're gonna get rich, be big kingpins or whatever, and fuck everyone else; I've heard the same bullshit on an assembly line, or on a smoke break at Burger King.

Incidentally, stealing workers' stereos or whatever may be a scumfuck move, but it doesn't qualify you for the "exploiting classes" any more than snatching up employment or housing before some other sucker. Workers are forced into competition! News at 11.

(On the other hand, am I seriously seeing people in this thread defend pimps? What the fuck?)

Like I said elsewhere (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showthread.php?p=1500957#post1500957), I have some problems with the whole concept (or lack thereof) of the "lumpenproletariat", and this thread isn't winning me over to it. I'd actually like to see a real definition that would cover, say, Sarah Michelle Gellar, while excluding obvious capitalists [edit: for this thought experiment, Sarah's "only" income is from her acting jobs] or merely unlucky/dickheaded proles. Haven't run into a good one (i.e. one referring to material relations) yet.