Do the Bourgeoisie have class conscious?

[Remus Bleys]

Do they know they are exploiters, or do they genuinely believe in the bullshit the say about "hard work"?
And, I know they gang up, but is this temporary consciousness? Like, do they only gain it for a couple weeks? Or is this teaming up different?

[Ocean Seal]

Of course they do. How do you think they got so organized?

[argeiphontes]

"The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist."
-- Baudelaire (and Kaiser Soze :) )

[1RebelSoul]

Do they know they are exploiters, or do they genuinely believe in the bullshit the say about "hard work"?
And, I know they gang up, but is this temporary consciousness? Like, do they only gain it for a couple weeks? Or is this teaming up different?

They are very much conscious. They need a veil of idealism to hide their bestial greedy instincts. They don't value friendship. They just hunt-in-packs.

[jookyle]

They are so conscious they not only know how to organize to maintain their power as a class but know to keep such consciousness from developing in the other classes.

[G4b3n]

They are extremely class conscious. You can read past business reports that speak of the need for keeping workers passive and compliant, not only are they class conscious, but they also use it to keep the working classes from forming anything of the sort, and if they do, they assure that it is liberal and never revolutionary in institutional structure.

"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum" - Noam Chomsky

[Le Socialiste]

I would say the ruling-class holds varying degrees of consciousness, yes. This doesn't preclude it from the emergence of divergent interests within its own ranks however, as history has shown us. We've also seen how quickly the ruling-classes of the world can regain their footing and confidence in times of crisis, too - though this has more to do with it holding the tools and machinery of the state, as well as other general means of protecting itself against potential threats.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Class consciousness for them in a general sense is also "common sense" by and large. Working class consciousness is harder to organize because the stream of ideas in society flows the other way. But for someone who is running society, a lot of their interests are just the "running of society". Any attacks or threats to the ruling class are also generally "threats to society". They see their interests as the best for all society and that's generally how ruling class ideas present themselves.

[Rafiq]

Their consciousness is expressed through their active attempts to retain state power. As proletarian consciousness can only really be expressed by the struggle for state power.

[G4b3n]

Their consciousness is expressed through their active attempts to retain state power. As proletarian consciousness can only really be expressed by the struggle for state power.

Or to abolish state power* ;)1

[Popular Front of Judea]

The sad thing is that the bourgeoisie is quite class conscious and is willing to work together to further their class interest. That is the only way to understand the rout of the last 40 years.

This is a remarkable document: The Powell Memo (http://reclaimdemocracy.org/powell_memo_lewis/)

[Fred]

I would say the the bourgeoisie of the world are a somewhat heterogeneous. In the US, the dominating perception is that there are "lower," "middle," and "upper" classes which are fluid and ill defined. I think this is both a convenience for the bourgeoisie and a fallacy arising from a tremendous lack of class consciousness on the part of the working class for the past 60 years or so. But of course, this does not keep the bourgeoisie for fighting like hell to extend and expand their control of production and society in general.

I think the bourgeoisie in other countries is more class conscious in the sense that they recognize that there is a proletariat and a bourgeoisie that have extreme conflicting interests in the way that society is organized. I was struck, many years ago, in the difference between the leading news magazine in the US (Time) and Britain (The Economist). Besides being much more literate and intellectual, the Economist, at the very least recognized both the existing classes and their relationship to each other. Time? Not so much. The Economist tends to be more informative even though it is almost always on the wrong side -- it at least indicates that there are sides.

[Rafiq]

Or to abolish state power* ;)1

No, this is nothing short of a moral, ideological strive with absolutely no class basis. There has been speculation that the state will wither away, but the ultimate task of the proletariat is the conquest of the state, the organ of class rule and total power. All class struggle has been the struggle for power, and always will be.

[G4b3n]

No, this is nothing short of a moral, ideological strive with absolutely no class basis. There has been speculation that the state will wither away, but the ultimate task of the proletariat is the conquest of the state, the organ of class rule and total power. All class struggle has been the struggle for power, and always will be.

I never said that it wasn't a struggle for power, that I agree with. However, state power is a different story. The notion that the state will wither away is just that, speculation. Control of production by the state is not worker's control and any sort socialism that doesn't involve worker's control is not a desirable form of socialism and I am sure there are plenty that would agree with that notion.

Asserting that anarchism has no class basis is simply slander. We can see examples of anarchism historically that clearly elevate the working class into power such as the revolution in Spain which made the soviet union look like the degenerated slave state that it was.

[Popular Front of Judea]

Noam Chomsky among others has long said that the most honest, informative reporting occurs in the business press. Socialists and class struggle anarchists should read the Financial Times if nothing else.


I was struck, many years ago, in the difference between the leading news magazine in the US (Time) and Britain (The Economist). Besides being much more literate and intellectual, the Economist, at the very least recognized both the existing classes and their relationship to each other. Time? Not so much. The Economist tends to be more informative even though it is almost always on the wrong side -- it at least indicates that there are sides.

[Skyhilist]

They have class consciousness insofar as they know what they are doing.

However, they might not classify it as what it really is -- exploitation. So in that sense maybe not all of them are class conscious because they don't realize "in capitalism the bourgeois exploit the working class?" Is it something that should abundantly obvious to someone who's a member of the exploiting capitalist class? Yes. However, many capitalists have become experts at doing the mental gymnastics needed to fool themselves into thinking that what they are doing is simply "running the economy" and not exploiting the workers, so that they can rationalize their behavior and feel better about themselves. So in this sense, they aren't entirely class conscious. They're aware of what they're doing, but they aren't always aware of the fact that is exploitation. Essentially, they've become too mentally ill in many cases to tell right from wrong, while simultaneously pursuing the wrong thing the vast majority of the time.

[tachosomoza]

Yes, that's how they own the government and foment division to maintain their position. They're very conscious and very organized.