Petite Bourgeoisie?

[craigd89]

Do tradesmen(plumbers, hvac techs, electricians, masons) who own their own small shop with maybe a partner and a helper or two fall under this category?

[BIG BROTHER]

Yes they do, for example my mom cleans houses and has 1 employee and me for workers.

The petty-bourgeoisie is an interesting class as it can range from humble self-employed -semi-professionals to high earning professionals such as doctors, etc.

It can also be the owner of a small business like my mom who cleans houses, or someone who sells pirate CDs in the market, or it can be the rich owner of a large restaurant, etc.

So this class unlike the proletariat doesn't have a clear orientation, on one side its pushed by the bourgeoisie to the side of the proletariat, on the other one it aspires to be a bourgeoisie.

[FreeEire]

As has been said, small businesses and people in the Middle Class (very broad) has an interest in the preservation of the system because they operate on the belief that they too can become part of the bourgeoisie.

At the moment, alot of people in this class have been shaken by the current economic conditions, certainly in Europe and I think there is room for expansion once they're convinced of the truth, that they can never be on par with the bourgeoisie.

[jinx92]

What social-economic category would you put a new york city fireman in? The reason I ask is because my dad is one, an although he is the lowest rank and doesn't own a buisness or anything, he makes about 100,000 a year because of the time he has on the job.

[RED DAVE]

What social-economic category would you put a new york city fireman in? The reason I ask is because my dad is one, an although he is the lowest rank and doesn't own a buisness or anything, he makes about 100,000 a year because of the time he has on the job.Member of the working class, especially since he belongs to a union. Same as sanitation workers.

Cops, however, are a different kettle of fish.

RED DAVE

[Tablo]

I don't think professionals such as doctors can all be considered petite-bourgeois. Doctors that work for an employer I think would better count as proletariat.

[BIG BROTHER]

I don't think professionals such as doctors can all be considered petite-bourgeois. Doctors that work for an employer I think would better count as proletariat.

Well yea, it depends on the situation of the doctor.

In the places were they are employees who earn their living by performing their labor, they are inedeed proletariats, albeit, they are more likely to earn a high wage compared to the majority of workers and that could give them a right-wing bias.

Having that said, in some parts doctors are militant members of unions!

On the other hand lets say this is a private family doctor who works independently and keeps all the profit from his labor, and in fact uses some of it to employ a nurse. Then he would be a petty-bourgeoisie.

[BIG BROTHER]

What social-economic category would you put a new york city fireman in? The reason I ask is because my dad is one, an although he is the lowest rank and doesn't own a buisness or anything, he makes about 100,000 a year because of the time he has on the job.

As Dave said, he is a proletariat. His relation to means of production and property are the following:

He doesn't own private property(and I mean productive one, like lets say a pizza shop, his own fire station, a hospital, factory, school, etc)

He earns a living by selling his labor, which in his case involves putting out fires and rescuing people.

And I would add a super coooooooooool proletariat.

It doesn't matter than he earns 100k per year, that means that he hasn't been as exploited as other sectors of the working class have.

[DaringMehring]

Why is a cop not a prole, RED DAVE?

[Tablo]

Why is a cop not a prole, RED DAVE?
I think a cop actually is a prole, but cops are also class traitors.

[Sixiang]

Why is a cop not a prole, RED DAVE?

They are proletariat because they have to sell their labor for wages. However, they are working to defend and protect the bourgeoisie for the most part.

[hatzel]

Any reason why it actually matters to categorise each and every profession into one of a few classes? 'I'm sorry, Mr Cleaner, but as I consider you petit bourgeois, my overly strict adherence to the concept of class consciousness means that I don't feel any compassion for you, and the revolution just isn't for you'

:closedeyes:

[BIG BROTHER]

Any reason why it actually matters to categorise each and every profession into one of a few classes? 'I'm sorry, Mr Cleaner, but as I consider you petit bourgeois, my overly strict adherence to the concept of class consciousness means that I don't feel any compassion for you, and the revolution just isn't for you'

:closedeyes:

It is very important to use class analysis in order to know what to do next in terms of revolutionary activity. Of course that at individual level is not as relevant but as society as a whole knowing the dynamics of the different classes is not only helpful but necessary.

For example, although the petty-bourgeoisie is not revolutionary, the pressure of the bourgeoisie on them can put them in the side of the proletariat.

In that case it would be wise to put forward demands that will secure the support of the petty-bourgeoisie while at the same time not letting them take leadership of the movement, as they would be unable to carry out the revolution.

[BIG BROTHER]

The Cops are not considered Proletariat just for the simple fact that they are part of the State, which in a capitalist country is the apparatus of repression used to maintain class rule.

The cops make a living by enforcing the capitalist system. That is what makes them so reactionary, their lives depend on ensure the existence of the state and capitalism.

Having that said, revolutions have shown that even members of the state, such as soldiers, poor police, etc can be brought to the side of the revolutionaries.

[FreeEire]

Well yea, it depends on the situation of the doctor.

In the places were they are employees who earn their living by performing their labor, they are inedeed proletariats, albeit, they are more likely to earn a high wage compared to the majority of workers and that could give them a right-wing bias.

Having that said, in some parts doctors are militant members of unions!

On the other hand lets say this is a private family doctor who works independently and keeps all the profit from his labor, and in fact uses some of it to employ a nurse. Then he would be a petty-bourgeoisie.

What about hospital consultant/surgeons who work for both the public and private system? They easily earn over €200,000/$258,000 per year but are known to give more preference to patients coming from private insurance companies while public patients have to wait months, even years, for operations.

I've so far never met a doctor or lawyer who has been receptive to any Leftist (even social democratic) positions. Rather most responses fit this one "if your kind ever got into power in this country, people like me would have to leave the country" as quoted from a multi-millionaire lawyer who coincidentally worked for tribunals investigating government corruption at around a thousand per day.

[graymouser]

The petite bourgeoisie are important sociologically inasmuch as they are inherently atomized, and their interests are not united as a class in the same sense that the proletariat's interests are united. However, in the long historical trend they are pressed into the ranks of the proletariat, and their ultimate interests are with the workers - and some of them can even be won over to the class struggle. But that is not definite or reliable, and proletarian leadership is essential.

[BIG BROTHER]

What about hospital consultant/surgeons who work for both the public and private system? They easily earn over €200,000/$258,000 per year but are known to give more preference to patients coming from private insurance companies while public patients have to wait months, even years, for operations.

I've so far never met a doctor or lawyer who has been receptive to any Leftist (even social democratic) positions. Rather most responses fit this one "if your kind ever got into power in this country, people like me would have to leave the country" as quoted from a multi-millionaire lawyer who coincidentally worked for tribunals investigating government corruption at around a thousand per day.

Weather you work for a private or a public system doesn't matter. What matters is your relation to the means of production.

Surgeons are still proletariats, except the rarity of their labor can earn them really high wages which influence their class consciousness.

And yea I believe you that they don't really give a shit about the poorer patients of course.

That Proletariat class is revolutionary as a whole but the more you individualize it, the more you can find reactionary elements and more revolutionary ones. Even within the bourgeoisie once in a while you have a person here and there that comes to the side of the proletariat.

But anyways just to give you another perspective in Mexico a lot of doctors have been pushed more and more to the rank of the proletariat.

There are for example a chain of clinics that sell generic medicine and that have a doctor which you can see for the equivalent of 2 dollars. Although they remain petty bourgeoisie as the money goes directly to them, they are much more closer to the proletariat, they don't earn a lot of money, etc.

Also in the IMSS which is like our super cheap health care system in Mexico, the doctors are all part of their Union which does stuff like shut down facilities, protest, etc

and you can tell those folks that say they'll leave and take their money not to worry, we'll just nationalize the banks and take over their assets ;)

[BIG BROTHER]

Oh and for example I have a friend who is one of those people that use anesthesia. He earns a pretty damm high amount of money. Yet he is from Bosnia and always says that things were far better when Yugoslavia existed under Tito.

[FreeEire]

Weather you work for a private or a public system doesn't matter. What matters is your relation to the means of production.

Surgeons are still proletariats, except the rarity of their labor can earn them really high wages which influence their class consciousness.

And yea I believe you that they don't really give a shit about the poorer patients of course.

That Proletariat class is revolutionary as a whole but the more you individualize it, the more you can find reactionary elements and more revolutionary ones. Even within the bourgeoisie once in a while you have a person here and there that comes to the side of the proletariat.

But anyways just to give you another perspective in Mexico a lot of doctors have been pushed more and more to the rank of the proletariat.

There are for example a chain of clinics that sell generic medicine and that have a doctor which you can see for the equivalent of 2 dollars. Although they remain petty bourgeoisie as the money goes directly to them, they are much more closer to the proletariat, they don't earn a lot of money, etc.

Also in the IMSS which is like our super cheap health care system in Mexico, the doctors are all part of their Union which does stuff like shut down facilities, protest, etc

and you can tell those folks that say they'll leave and take their money not to worry, we'll just nationalize the banks and take over their assets ;)

I see where you're coming from now. I suppose largely it depends on the prevailing conditions in the particular country. Local circumstances have an impact on how strongly aligned particular professions and individual professionals are to the existing status quo.

A relatively new theory which is being put forward in Ireland by an economist called David McWilliams is that of "insiders and outsiders" in which he puts forward his hypothesis that things have moved on from class based politics to certain social groupings which are on the inside of the system (politicians, civil servants even lowly paid ones, police, etc.) who are dependent on the system and the outsiders (leftists, unemployed, etc.) who don't agree with the present system.

His basic view is that in recessions, those inside the system have gotten stronger and those outside the system get weaker and that this needs to be changed. To me it just sounds like a simplified class conflict, as you could equally say that both insiders and outsiders broadly represent bourgeoisie/petty bourgeoise and proletariat and are simply following their class interests.

[BIG BROTHER]

I see where you're coming from now. I suppose largely it depends on the prevailing conditions in the particular country. Local circumstances have an impact on how strongly aligned particular professions and individual professionals are to the existing status quo.

A relatively new theory which is being put forward in Ireland by an economist called David McWilliams is that of "insiders and outsiders" in which he puts forward his hypothesis that things have moved on from class based politics to certain social groupings which are on the inside of the system (politicians, civil servants even lowly paid ones, police, etc.) who are dependent on the system and the outsiders (leftists, unemployed, etc.) who don't agree with the present system.

His basic view is that in recessions, those inside the system have gotten stronger and those outside the system get weaker and that this needs to be changed. To me it just sounds like a simplified class conflict, as you could equally say that both insiders and outsiders broadly represent bourgeoisie/petty bourgeoise and proletariat and are simply following their class interests.


Yea I'm not too sure what he is trying to say. For one civil servants would be considered anybody who is employed by the government right?

Because then you are still defined by class. For example Here in the US last year not only students but many teachers and professors in the public system went on strike or took some form of action on March 4th to demonstrate against the budget cuts, which are of course implement by the government.

And what exactly does he mean by inside, dependent or outside the system? I mean for example the Proletariat IS part of capitalism, except the system has contradictions one being that the Proletariat wants to take power away from the bourgeoisie in order to establish its own system.

Anyways I do think besides class certain social groups matter, probably the biggest one is Race, although it is usually tied to class too.