Middle Class Interests

[Comrade #138672]

What exactly are the interests of the middle class (professors, lawyers, scientists, etc)? They're part of the proletariat, but they may have more difficulty identifying with it as they're closer to the bourgeoisie. How can they be convinced that a revolution would be in their class interest; or what material conditions are needed to make it appealing to them?

Some middle class people I spoke think that Communism means nothing more than "equal poverty". They feel that it will "lower" them to poverty. They prefer letting the bourgeoisie rule them, because to them it seems that the bourgeoisie has more to offer.

[VirgJans12]

The "middle class" was invented by the bourgeoisie to make well-off proletarians feel better. That class doesn't exist. They are also in no way closer to the bourgeoisie than to the proletariat. The bourgeoisie is the class that owns all the means of production; lawyers, professors, scientists, etc. are not the owners of their respective courts/schools/etc. and therefore are simply employees (proletarians). Their paycheck may be higher than average, but as long as you don't possess means of production, you're a proletarian.

They think people will become equally poor because they look at the former Soviet block and see poor countries. The thing is, those countries were far poorer both before their revolutions and after their fall in 1989. While ruled by communist governments, they were wealthier than they were under any other rule. Also, in pure communism, poverty will be non-existent.

[officer nugz]

What exactly are the interests of the middle class (professors, lawyers, scientists, etc)? They're part of the proletariat, but they may have more difficulty identifying with it as they're closer to the bourgeoisie. How can they be convinced that a revolution would be in their class interest; or what material conditions are needed to make it appealing to them?economic recessions and depressions generally decrease the amount of people in the "middle class" by squeezing out a substantial portion of professionals and small business owners, as well as causing capitalism to make attacks on the unionized middle class people (such as teachers), who only became sociologically middle class due to their unions.

Some middle class people I spoke think that Communism means nothing more than "equal poverty". They feel that it will "lower" them to poverty. They prefer letting the bourgeoisie rule them because to them it seems that they have more to offer.[/QUOTE]that's not just something middle class people believe, it's a pretty pervasive aspect of american ideology. as is the idea that the ruling class are not rulers in any real sense of the word.

[Lynx]

If you have an interesting job and an income that allows you to live a comfortable lifestyle, then chances are you'll be more satisfied with your role as a worker.

Being able to call your job a profession is also soothing for some people. I'm not a worker, I'm a professional...

[MustCrushCapitalism]

Marxists define class by relations to the means of production. There is no actual class interest for the "middle class". In the class interest of proletarians, who do not hold ownership over the means of production, is the abolition of private ownership of the means of production. The bourgeoisie have class interests in the opposite, and working their employees the maximum amount of time for the least pay. These two classes have diametrically opposed interests. "Middle class" doesn't really mean anything solid and can refer to people of proletarian or petty bourgeois class.

[The Jay]

The higher paid proletariat sometimes have good reason to maintain capitalism. Some make a lot of money and a revolution would gain them less than they would lose in some respects, at least in the short term. In a sense, they're like cops in that they have an interest in keeping things the way that they are.

[Vanguard1917]

The middle class does exist and it does have its own class outlook. Doctors, architects, university professors, etc., are members of the bourgeois intellegentsia. In periods of class conflict they may vacillate and sway from one side to the other, sometimes taking the side of workers, but that doesn't mean that they don't have interests distinct from workers.

[Positivist]

The middle class does exist and it does have its own class outlook. Doctors, architects, university professors, etc., are members of the bourgeois intellegentsia. In periods of class conflict they may vacillate and sway from one side to the other, sometimes taking the side of workers, but that doesn't mean that they don't have interests distinct from workers.

While university professors usually constitute the bourgiose intelligentsia, the other mentioned professions do not. Architects and doctors perform a valuable social role and we would continue to require there skills in a post-capitalist economy. Furthermore, intellectual ability is still marketed as a commodity by these professionals out of necessity. These workers may be compensated better than the average worker but it is merely because they are in high demand and short supply. These workers still stand to benefit from the democratic management of the productive process.

[The Jay]

While university professors usually constitute the bourgiose intelligentsia, the other mentioned professions do not. Architects and doctors perform a valuable social role and we would continue to require there skills in a post-capitalist economy. Furthermore, intellectual ability is still marketed as a commodity by these professionals out of necessity. These workers may be compensated better than the average worker but it is merely because they are in high demand and short supply. These workers still stand to benefit from the democratic management of the productive process.


Not really. Do you think that a heart surgeon that makes a million dollars a year is likely to risk his elevated social status to end his exploitation? No. Do you think that a professional athlete would be willing to give up even more when he/she does something that is little more than entertainment? No.

What they may gain is, frankly, probably less than what they would lose, at least at the moment.

[theblackmask]

Marxists define class by relations to the means of production.

Yes, because Marxist fetishize production more than capitalists do. I don't care if they don't own a factory or whatever...Professors serve to indoctrinate students, lawyers are almost living embodiments of the state's rule, and scientists simply think of new ways to kill more people. If you serve the state, rather by owning its means of production, or serving those who do...you are my enemy.

[Positivist]

Not really. Do you think that a heart surgeon that makes a million dollars a year is likely to risk his elevated social status to end his exploitation? No. Do you think that a professional athlete would be willing to give up even more when he/she does something that is little more than entertainment? No.

What they may gain is, frankly, probably less than what they would lose, at least at the moment.

Well these are a pretty small minority of the overall non-industrial labor force. A regular doctor or an architect could definitely support socialism if they were willing to learn anything about it.

[The Jay]

Well these are a pretty small minority of the overall non-industrial labor force. A regular doctor or an architect could definitely support socialism if they were willing to learn anything about it.

Probably, yeah. The thing is that they're a bit less pressed, but at the same time look at who the stereotype of the protester is.

[Positivist]

Probably, yeah. The thing is that they're a bit less pressed, but at the same time look at who the stereotype of the protester is.

Oh they're definitely less pressed, and today its really unfeasible (at least in the United States) that too many of these workers who fall at the higher end of the payroll would even consider it. Economic crisis though could open some up, especially those from poor backgrounds.

[Marxaveli]

Yes, because Marxist fetishize production more than capitalists do. I don't care if they don't own a factory or whatever...Professors serve to indoctrinate students, lawyers are almost living embodiments of the state's rule, and scientists simply think of new ways to kill more people. If you serve the state, rather by owning its means of production, or serving those who do...you are my enemy.

This is pretty short-sighted, I think. Considering ALL of our society either controls the means to production or has to work for the individuals who do, so they can survive under this barbaric system, that would imply all of society is your enemy.

Unless I am somehow misconstruing your post....

[Rafiq]

Yes, because Marxist fetishize production more than capitalists do. I don't care if they don't own a factory or whatever...Professors serve to indoctrinate students, lawyers are almost living embodiments of the state's rule, and scientists simply think of new ways to kill more people. If you serve the state, rather by owning its means of production, or serving those who do...you are my enemy.

And proletarians produce, manufactor their weapons and trinkets, the bastards!

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

[Vanguard1917]

While university professors usually constitute the bourgiose intelligentsia, the other mentioned professions do not. Architects and doctors perform a valuable social role and we would continue to require there skills in a post-capitalist economy.

Then so do university professors, since who else teaches doctors and architects their trade?

But the real issue is not about whether these people perform useful 'social roles' or not. The middle stratum of well-off professionals, along with the middle and senior management of large companies, state bureaucrats and small business owners, experience capitalism in a way that is different from society's majority - the class that toils for a wage.

[fug]

Actually the lumpen are even less likely to have "proper" class consciousness.

[officer nugz]

Yes, because Marxist fetishize production more than capitalists do. I don't care if they don't own a factory or whatever...Professors serve to indoctrinate students, lawyers are almost living embodiments of the state's rule, and scientists simply think of new ways to kill more people. If you serve the state, rather by owning its means of production, or serving those who do...you are my enemy.this is dumb considering that the majority of professors do not teach political courses. and the ones that do have a large amount of autonomy from state regulations which means that whether or not they teach subservience to capitalism and the state is entirely up to the individuals own ideology. high school teachers are in fact much more a tool of the state in that they have to rigidly teach what the state wants them to.

and as far as scientists, the idea that the majority of them design weapons is so ridiculous that it's not worth explaining why that's wrong.

[Psy]

The middle class does exist and it does have its own class outlook. Doctors, architects, university professors, etc., are members of the bourgeois intellegentsia. In periods of class conflict they may vacillate and sway from one side to the other, sometimes taking the side of workers, but that doesn't mean that they don't have interests distinct from workers.
Not really.

Take the professionals in the space industry, now that NASA budget had been gutted they find themselves unemployed as they are laid off as even engineers and scientists are seen labor in the abstract just as Marx said bourgeoisie views all proletariat. The fact rocket scientists are highly skilled labor did stop them being laid off in mass as soon as they were not longer considered exploitable to the bourgeoisie.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

The middle class does exist and it does have its own class outlook. Doctors, architects, university professors, etc., are members of the bourgeois intellegentsia. In periods of class conflict they may vacillate and sway from one side to the other, sometimes taking the side of workers, but that doesn't mean that they don't have interests distinct from workers.

They are just one of many different subgroups of workers. They are the subgroup which is merely better of, but their lives are still determined by hierarchical institutions which they are working under.

Have you folks really seen the wages which part time and non tenured university lecturers make? It's exceedingly low for that amount of time and money spent on education. Their institutions are routinely getting slashed by the ruling class, which means a loss of employment opportunity for them and increasing the competition among academics, simply because under the austerity program governments don't want to spend resources giving higher learning to the working class. Many need to worry about paying off loans, getting on the tenure track, and keeping up with the publishing race. They are like highschool teachers with a moderately larger salary (if that) and a few more years of training.

Doctors are not "bourgeois intellectuals" but people with advanced health training. Only those in private practice own their own "means of production", and while they usually receive sizable salaries for their efforts they need to work long hours. A doctor in private practice is a member of the petit bourgeois small business class, and some doctors become very financially successful off of this, but a doctor generally speaking is not a member of the ruling class. They are merely doing highly skilled labor for a powerful institution (like a hospital, the state or, in the USA, an hmo).

Architectual firms are not simply one well paid bourgeois fellow coming up with grand designs all by himself like some kind of Randian genius. The person who owns the firm, especially if they are a hotshot architect, might be a bourgeois business owner, but all the people who work at his firm laying out floor plans, doing mathematical calculations, rendering it in software etc are workers as much as any other.

Lawyers on the other hand are really hard to defend because the very institution in which they work is a set of rules designed to uphold the interests of the wealthy, but even there, a good many lawyers are forced to struggle for many years to pay off their debts and are working long hours for a very reasonable wage.


The problem with these kinds of professional workers is that they can potentially receive comfortable, upper income jobs if they keep working their ass off for many years, which gives them a stake in the bourgeois system. Many have been co-opted by this fact and will work to keep their social advantages. But they're still workers.

[NewLeft]

Not really. Do you think that a heart surgeon that makes a million dollars a year
This is really not the case, one of my neighbours is a cardiac surgeon and she makes less than 60k a year, after dues etc. Maybe a celebrity surgeon, but otherwise no.

[Ocean Seal]

Yes, because Marxist fetishize production more than capitalists do. I don't care if they don't own a factory or whatever...Professors serve to indoctrinate students, lawyers are almost living embodiments of the state's rule, and scientists simply think of new ways to kill more people. If you serve the state, rather by owning its means of production, or serving those who do...you are my enemy.
Pretty sure most of them work on other stuff too. But anyway aren't workers your enemy, since without them we wouldn't have this horrible system of exploitation as capitalism would collapse. They seem to be the integral part of this.

[Comrade #138672]

Pretty sure most of them work on other stuff too. But anyway aren't workers your enemy, since without them we wouldn't have this horrible system of exploitation as capitalism would collapse. They seem to be the integral part of this.Even though I don't think they're our enemies, I do agree with him that they play a more direct role in empowering and reproducing Capitalism.