Log in

View Full Version : Non Marxists such as Black Nationalists and other types using the term Bourgeoisie ?



tradeunionsupporter
4th June 2012, 15:02
Non Marxists such as Black Nationalists and other types using the term Bourgeoisie ? What is your opinion of this ?
bourgeois blacks in european society. racism alive and well.
by THE ARENA (http://www.revleft.com/the_arena)
in News (http://www.revleft.com/news)
Airdate: Wed, January 4, 2012
bourgeois: a member of the middle class.a person whose political, economic and social opinions are believed to be determined mainly by concern for property values and conventional respectability. dominated or characterized by materialistic pursuits or concerns. so called booshe blacks who think they have arrived in european society are only fooling themselves. you have bought into classism, elitism and capitalism but are giving away whatever inner substance you might have because you cant put a value on it. what you represent is self-hatred, hatred of your own race and seek acceptance of european society because you believe that what you have makes you feel like you have made it. everything that you have job, education, money, house, car, clothing and other materialism everything you have gotten from white people so you cant possibly be equal to the producer being a consumer for it can be taken away without notice. and to believe racism is dead because you dont see black people lynched, hanging from trees, set on fire and beat by police racism is alive, well and even more dangerous because it is hidden.in the new year and years to come if we dont separate, get our own and turn to afrikan consciousness we are done as a race!!! black people still think they love you?
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/the_arena/2012/01/05/facoli (http://www.blogtalkradio.com/the_arena/2012/01/05/facoli)
JEWS... BLOODSUCKERS OF THE POOR.
by THE ARENA (http://www.revleft.com/the_arena)
in History (http://www.revleft.com/history)
Airdate: Tue, March 20, 2012
IN ORDER 4 A FEW PEOPLE 2 BE RICH A MAJORITY HAVE 2 BE POOR AND AT THE TOP OF THE PYRAMID THERE IS NONE OTHER BUT THE JEW. THESE PEOPLE R NOT GREAT THEY ARE JUST MORE SKILLED AT ERY WHICH IS WHY THEY R SOO HATED BY THEIR AMERIKKKAN EUROPEAN BROTHER. JEWS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN SKILLED IN USURY I.E. INTEREST FROM THE AGES THANKS 2 MAYER AMSHEL ROTSCHILD THE HEAD OF A LEADING JEWISH BANKING FAMILY WHOSE ANCESTORS 2DAY CONTINUE 2 SUCK THE BLOOD OF THE POOR AND HAVE A SECRET RELATIONSHIP WITH BLACK PUPPET POLITICIANS, EDUCATORS, PREACHERS AND BUSINESSMEN. SO-CALLED HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES, BLACK ORGINIZATIONS, COMMUNITY CENTERS ALL FUNDED BY JEWS WHICH IS WHY WE STILL DONT BENEFIT FROM ANY OF THIS. JEWS CONTROL THE MUSIC INDUSTRY SUCKING THE BLOOD DRY OF BLACK TALENT AND ROBBING THE YOUTH FROM THE NEGATIVE MESSAGE THEIR INDUSTRY PUPPETS PUT OUT. GAS PRICES, THE ECONOMY, HIGH SALES TAXESANYTHING 2 KEEP POOR PEOPLE POOR AND MAKE OTHERS THE JEWS R RESPONSIBLE.IN ORDER 2 FIGHT AGAINST BEING PLAYED YOU MUST KNOW WHO IS PLAYING U.
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/the_arena/2012/03/21/the-best-of-underground-hip-hop-with-j-rolls (http://www.blogtalkradio.com/the_arena/2012/03/21/the-best-of-underground-hip-hop-with-j-rolls)
The Birth Of Two Nations
by THE ARENA (http://www.revleft.com/the_arena)
in News (http://www.revleft.com/news)
Airdate: Sat, August 8, 2009
Special guest Tom Metzger. Tune in; the show will be very educational and enlightening.
http://ww2.blogtalkradio.com/the_arena/2009/08/09/logical-thinking-with-blackson (http://ww2.blogtalkradio.com/the_arena/2009/08/09/logical-thinking-with-blackson)
American Black Upper Class
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The American Black Upper Class consists of African American (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/African_American) professionals in fields such as law (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Law), medicine (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Medicine), business (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Business) and entertainment (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Entertainment) that have incomes that amount to $100,000 or more.[1] (http://www.revleft.com/vb//lcite_note-0) This class, sometimes referred to as the black upper-middle-class or The black elite (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/The_black_elite), represents less than 1 percent of the total black population in the United States.[2] (http://www.revleft.com/vb//lcite_note-1) This group of African Americans (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/African_Americans) has a history of organizations and activities that distinguish it from other classes within the black community as well as from the white upper class. Many of these traditions, which have persisted for several generations, are discussed in Lawrence Otis Graham (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Lawrence_Otis_Graham)’s 2000 book, Our Kind of People: Inside America’s Black Upper Class.
Scholarship on this class from a sociological perspective is generally traced to E. Franklin Frazier (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/E._Franklin_Frazier)'s Black Bourgeoisie (http://www.revleft.com/w/index.php?title=Black_Bourgeoisie&action=edit&redlink=1) ( first edition in English in 1957 translated from the 1955 French original).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Black_Upper_Class (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Black_Upper_Class)
WHERE DOES RACISM COME FROM?
Racism is not natural or inevitable. It is rooted in class society.
Racism developed alongside capitalism and the modern State since these emerged 500 years ago. It justified the conquest, slaughter and enslavement of indigenous people in the Americas, Asia and Africa. Later racism was used to divide and rule the working class majority, and to super- exploit and repress sections of the working- class.
Racist arguments said colonialism, slavery and Black worker oppression were a "civilising mission". In truth, racism gave huge profits and power to the capitalist ruling- classes of Europe and Japan.
WORKING- CLASS REVOLUTION
All Black people are victims of racism. But the Black middle and upper class elite is shielded from the worst effects of racism by their privileged status in capitalism. They can live in the suburbs, go to private schools and earn big salaries- we can't.
We must fight racism wherever it exists. But we working and poor people must not build alliances with Black managers and capitalists, because they will always choose profits over socialism. They want to exploit us. But we, the workers and the poor, create all social wealth. Only we can build a free society because only we do not exploit.
A united multi-racial class struggle of all the workers of the world is the only road to freedom. A united struggle on a principled anti-racist platform is vital.
WHITE WORKERS AND RACISM
All races are fundamentally equal. There is as much difference within each "race" as there is between the "races". This means that there is no such thing as an inferior or superior race, or as an inherent racial characteristic like mathematical ability.
Obviously this means that we do not accept the bourgeois- nationalist argument that White people are always racists.
Another issue that always get raised is the question of whether White workers benefit from racism. In examining this issue we need to distinguish between different circumstances.
In South Africa, which was historically a colony of white settlement, the small White working class received massive and real gains from the racist system because of the bosses need to strengthen racial capitalism. With the fall of Apartheid, the racist privileges are rapidly eroding, opening up the possibility of sections of White workers joining with Black in large numbers as reliable allies.
In countries like Britain and Europe, where the white working class forms the majority of the population, the situation is more complex.
While White workers in these countries may receive some limited short- term benefits from racism, such as a slightly lower rate of unemployment, these benefits are limited. Whites still make up the majority of the poor and unemployed here. And racism has serious long - term effects which outweigh short- term gains- it seriously divides and weakens working class struggles. In all these countries there is a strong anti-racist working-class tradition, evident from large-scale White participation in riots against racial oppression. Racism is therefore not in the real interests of the Euro-American working- class.
http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/africa/wsfws/2_2racism.html (http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/africa/wsfws/2_2racism.html)
Myth: The criminal justice system is not biased against the poor.
Fact: Nearly everyone commits crime -- only the poor are generally punished for it.
Summary
All classes commit crime. However, the poor experience higher rates of arrest, criminal charges, convictions, long prison sentences and denial of parole. This winnowing process ensures that most rich criminals never see the inside of a prison, while overflowing them with the poor.
BIAS IN CONVICTIONS
The O.J. Simpson murder trial provided us with a snapshot of a system that is heavily biased towards money -- even more so than race.
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-CJSpoor.htm (http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-CJSpoor.htm)
INTERVIEWER: Your mentor, Herbert Marcuse once back in '58, as I recall, said that one of the things that would happen as blacks made gains in the civil rights movement was that there would be the creation of a black bourgeoisie and that's certainly been one of the things that's happened as we look back from the vantage point of 1997. How do you see the role of the black bourgeoisie in the continuing struggle?
DAVIS: Actually we've had a black bourgeoisie or the makings of a black bourgeoisie for many more decades.... if we look at one of our great leaders, W.E.B. Du Bois, he was associated with a very minuscule black bourgeoisie in the 19th century so this is not something that is substantively new although the numbers of black people who now count themselves among the black bourgeoisie certainly does make an enormous difference.
In a sense the quest for the emancipation of black people in the US has always been a quest for economic liberation which means to a certain extent that the rise of black middle class would be inevitable. What I think is different today is the lack of political connection between the black middle class and the increasing numbers of black people who are more impoverished than ever before.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/race/interviews/davis.html (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/race/interviews/davis.html)
Tom Metzger guest of The Movement hosted Onyxdaughter
by THE ARENA (http://www.revleft.com/the_arena)
in Podcasting (http://www.revleft.com/podcasting)
Airdate: Thu, August 19, 2010
White separatist stops by to tell us what he thinks. The discussion really gets heated listen in.
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/the_arena/2010/08/20/the-movement-hosted-onyxdaughter (http://www.blogtalkradio.com/the_arena/2010/08/20/the-movement-hosted-onyxdaughter)
Do you have beef with the Arena? Bring it on!
by THE ARENA (http://www.revleft.com/the_arena)
in News (http://www.revleft.com/news)
Airdate: Sat, August 15, 2009
Many people have been calling and emailing Michelle and Blackson about last weeks show with Tom Metzger. Some many people now have so much to say. Well,this is your chance to address the issue. We say bring it on!
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/the_arena/2009/08/16/logical-thinking-with-blackson (http://www.blogtalkradio.com/the_arena/2009/08/16/logical-thinking-with-blackson)

Ocean Seal
4th June 2012, 15:35
I despise when people say that the bourgeoisie is the middle class. I really do. Without any context its meaningless.

Rafiq
5th June 2012, 00:20
Anarchists use the term as well. It isn't something unique to Marxism, after all.

Brosa Luxemburg
5th June 2012, 00:23
I despise when people say that the bourgeoisie is the middle class. I really do. Without any context its meaningless.

I also hate when people assume income levels determine if you are apart of the bourgeoisie or not. That has much more to do with relations to production than income levels (although it seems to be the case that the higher the income level, the better chance someone is bourgeois for obvious reasons).

Peoples' War
6th June 2012, 04:30
Marx isn't the Jesus of all leftist language. Even if, which he didn't, come up with the term "bourgeoisie", other leftists be they Marxist or not, have free reign to use it.

Black Nationalists, a lot of whom are radicals and Marxists, can use it. Anarchists can use it. Anyone.

I agree with Brosa here, as well, that it is annoying to see income level determining whether or not someone is of the ruling class.

IT IS RELATION TO THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION, HELLO!!

Pretty Flaco
6th June 2012, 04:38
IT IS RELATION TO THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION, HELLO!!

well i dont see how you could expect anyone that isnt familiar with marxism to know that.

Peoples' War
6th June 2012, 04:55
well i dont see how you could expect anyone that isnt familiar with marxism to know that.
I don't.

If they were familiar with Marx, they'd be Marxists.

Azraella
7th June 2012, 14:01
I don't.

If they were familiar with Marx, they'd be Marxists.

I'm not a Marxist and I am familiar with Marxist ideas; I'm an anarchist.

Dennis the 'Bloody Peasant'
7th June 2012, 14:40
I see why people make the connection between private wealth and belonging to the ruling class (money can buy anything, including political influence through 'lobbying' and other forms of bribery).
My dad is not rich by any means, but he is definately middle class in terms of his earnings and lifestyle. He is not a member of the ruling class (in fact, he's very apathetic and non-committal on most political issues). He could become a millionaire but still not be part of the 'bourgeousie'.
I also like to make distinctions between wealthy and rich (based on a bit by Chris Rock :D). Multi-millionaire footballers are rich, the guys that sign their paychecks are wealthy. The wealthy and the owners of the means of production form the ruling class, I think; being rich does not automatically make you part of that club.

l'Enfermé
7th June 2012, 15:07
I'm not a Marxist and I am familiar with Marxist ideas; I'm an anarchist.
If you were familiar with Marxist "ideas" you'd be a Marxist and an atheist.

Azraella
7th June 2012, 16:01
If you were familiar with Marxist "ideas" you'd be a Marxist and an atheist.

Marxism does not imply atheism, bro. Marx's materialism is not metaphysical materialism, it's historical materialism. An analysis of history.

Secondly, I use Marxist economics and historical materialism, to some that makes me a Marxist. I choose the anarchist label, because I view authority/hierarchy as much as a problem as capitalism.

Edit: in fact, I find it amusing that Marxist has to imply atheist. Marx viewed it as a private matter and thought religion would eventually die out. Lenin and his ilk were the ones who thought atheists had to be militant. I'm often described as a "religious atheist" because I don't literally believe in Gods, the afterlife, or any of that and I just go through the motions. I view it as part of my psyche. I'm also pretty confident that pandeism(in the vein of a Bohmian implicate order or Haisch's God) is not incompatible with Marxism because I don't believe in an intervening, personal God.

Valdyr
7th June 2012, 21:18
Bourgeoisie was a pretty common term in the socialist movement before Marx's use of the term.


Marxism does not imply atheism, bro. Marx's materialism is not metaphysical materialism, it's historical materialism. An analysis of history.

I would disagree with this, as I think it is more complicated than this. Certainly, Marx's materialism was different from vulgar ontological materialism, but I don't agree with the thesis that only a social scientific methodology is implicit in Marx, and whatever philosophy is still possible is completely autonomous.

It must be remembered that Marx considered the criticism of religion as such to be essentially complete, not that it didn't have to happen. The reason I think one can see Marxism as not "entailing" atheism is that it certainly doesn't entail a naturalistic rejection of theism which relies on the same logic. Rather, implicit in Marx is a method (dialectical) and a history of German critical philosophy which critiques the very schema out of which the conventional "does God exist?" question would even arise to begin with. It is "post-theist," a far more radical break with theistic thinking than mere atheism.


Edit: in fact, I find it amusing that Marxist has to imply atheist. Marx viewed it as a private matter and thought religion would eventually die out. Lenin and his ilk were the ones who thought atheists had to be militant.

Lenin also considered religion a private matter from a political standpoint.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1909/may/13.htm

Lenin's point is that a consistent Marxist should end up an atheist, and that therefore from a theoretical standpoint the party should promote atheist consciousness. This is not the same thing as state atheism, or requiring atheism of party members, and the like.


I'm often described as a "religious atheist" because I don't literally believe in Gods, the afterlife, or any of that and I just go through the motions. I view it as part of my psyche. I'm also pretty confident that pandeism(in the vein of a Bohmian implicate order or Haisch's God) is not incompatible with Marxism because I don't believe in an intervening, personal God.

I could be described as a religious atheist as well inasmuch as I think there is value in the eschatological message of religion and the sometimes emancipatory potential of religious communities when they can create alternative social spaces. However, I don't think an intervening, personal God is all that Marxism precludes, as I see that taking the Marxist critique to its logical conclusion entails a radical break with any notion of transcendence.

Then again, I am not an orthodox Marxist, but this is what I take from Marx himself on the subject. This is perhaps partly because I do not subscribe to the "epistemological break" hypothesis (the idea of a radical break between the young "Hegelian" Marx and the later Marx) except in the focus and style of his writings.

Tim Finnegan
7th June 2012, 21:35
IT IS RELATION TO THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION, HELLO!!
"Relations within the process of social reproduction" is better. Less positivist.