Dimentio
9th March 2010, 19:36
I do not think that class struggle is possible to understand without understanding class collaborationism. While class struggle is existent throughout all times, the same could be said to be true of class collaborationism.
If we assumed that the only force which kept the population in check was violence or the threat of violence, we would be able to observe constant resentment and hatred against the ruling class. I do not say that such relationships do not exist. They have existed in history, notable examples being the relation between the Anglosaxons and the Normans during the high middle ages, as well as the relationship between Israelis and Palestinians today. Those both cases illuminate a relationship where the ruled subject cannot accept the legitimacy of a ruling class and the rulers have to resort to naked violence in order to keep power.
Class tensions also tend to increase during conditions when the society is under pressure from external or internal changes, which could be foreign invasions, natural disasters or technological transformations of the infrastructure and the means of production.
What I mean with class-collaborationism in this thread is not the act of scabbing on other workers, or report one another to the police or the fascists, but rather the everyday acceptance of the established order which we could observe in people. People are accepting repressive conditions which are imposed on them as their individual responsibility or as fate.
The political establishment is most often seen as legitimate. That is not only the case of modern societies, but also of pre-industrial societies. For example, revolts in the Middle Ages tended to be reactionary, as the people often interpreted policies which were repressive as a situation where the evil advisors of the king had imposed reforms which were ending the idea of how a good feudal order should look like. Wat Tyler and Stenka Razin for example.
I would claim that a large aspect of the fact that class societies tend to emerge naturally under different forms, is that human beings are pack animals and tend to differentiate their roles inside the pack. Most human beings seem to be content in repressive situations as long they have got used to them, and look up to the ruling class and its institutions for guidance. Most people seem to not want to meddle in politics and just reach a state of personal safety or safety for what they perceive to be their closest group.
If we assumed that the only force which kept the population in check was violence or the threat of violence, we would be able to observe constant resentment and hatred against the ruling class. I do not say that such relationships do not exist. They have existed in history, notable examples being the relation between the Anglosaxons and the Normans during the high middle ages, as well as the relationship between Israelis and Palestinians today. Those both cases illuminate a relationship where the ruled subject cannot accept the legitimacy of a ruling class and the rulers have to resort to naked violence in order to keep power.
Class tensions also tend to increase during conditions when the society is under pressure from external or internal changes, which could be foreign invasions, natural disasters or technological transformations of the infrastructure and the means of production.
What I mean with class-collaborationism in this thread is not the act of scabbing on other workers, or report one another to the police or the fascists, but rather the everyday acceptance of the established order which we could observe in people. People are accepting repressive conditions which are imposed on them as their individual responsibility or as fate.
The political establishment is most often seen as legitimate. That is not only the case of modern societies, but also of pre-industrial societies. For example, revolts in the Middle Ages tended to be reactionary, as the people often interpreted policies which were repressive as a situation where the evil advisors of the king had imposed reforms which were ending the idea of how a good feudal order should look like. Wat Tyler and Stenka Razin for example.
I would claim that a large aspect of the fact that class societies tend to emerge naturally under different forms, is that human beings are pack animals and tend to differentiate their roles inside the pack. Most human beings seem to be content in repressive situations as long they have got used to them, and look up to the ruling class and its institutions for guidance. Most people seem to not want to meddle in politics and just reach a state of personal safety or safety for what they perceive to be their closest group.