The bourgeoisie

[Karl Marx's Camel]

To what extent do you believe the bourgeoisie are conscious in their supression of the workers?

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

They don't need to be conscious . . . some, no doubt, are, but capitalism functions in such a way that it is as natural as picking up a bag of potatos at the grocery store. One does not have to be aware of their role in the propertied class to play it - and given humans seeming tendency to do what they believe it is right, it is often better that the owners are are blissfully indoctrinated, and lacking any concept of class.

[redstar2000]

Well, we can't see inside their heads...but if you look at the stuff they write on "labor relations", it's pretty obvious that keeping the working class submissive and productive is a very high priority with them.

Of course, it's not "suppression" in their minds...or at least it doesn't carry the negative ethical implications that the word normally carries.

In their minds, they think working class submission is "good for the workers"...just as slave-owners once defended slavery as "good for the slaves".

Who knows if they believed their own propaganda?

And who cares?

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[Monty Cantsin]

Who knows if they believed their own propaganda?

And who cares?

it's only a real problem really if we believe it. but members of the bourgeoisie who realise that the condition that made their mode of production rational no longer exist and even in contradiction to some of the principles of their rise, wouldn’t there disaffection help us?

[Essential Insignificance]

To what extent do you believe the bourgeoisie are conscious in their supression of the workers?

No more then the workers are "conscious" of their "suppression".

But the difference between the two -- is that the proletarian class is able to revolutionize and organize society -- free of bourgeois hegemony.

The bourgeois, will be thrown to the "dust bin" of history along with the proletarian class... and class society itself!

I think it would be "safe" to say that most capitalists don't know exactly how they deprive profit form the labor of the proletarian class -- but they certainly know how to maintain it.

Upon Marx's release of Capital in America, the publisher told the Wall Street assistants, that is tells you how to "maximize" your profit.

Guess what: they went and bought it in the droves! :lol:

[Faceless]

To what extent do you believe the bourgeoisie are conscious in their supression of the workers?
Well, unlike for the proletariat, a realisation that the existant society is based upon exploitation is contrary to bourgeois interests. A realisation therefore leads to a certain neurosis towards which, quite often, their own ideological constructs are quite often aimed. Charity is often a way in wich capitalists deceive themselves that they have done enough good for the proletariat for them to be elevated to the status of saint-hood. Just look at the the indifference of Geldoff n co. to the facts of capitalism; all entirely innocently propping up capitalism.

I go to a grammar school where there are a lot of rich kids who have bought tutors to get here. But the education here is the same ideological bullshit. Sometimes I have convinced some of them that capitalism is a system of exploitation and they come out and openly state that they dont care, they are still going to try and enjoy themselves in life regardless of who or what it costs. I have come back to debate the same people and they have tried again to defend capitalism from a morally superior perspective as if they give a shit! It is truly staggering the levels of self-deception that a bourgeois can layer on themselves! My point is that the capitalist will try to rest their minds that they are "right" even if their better judgements cast serious doubt on it. There are also a surprising number who skirt the question entirely with religion. At the end of the day they dont really consider proletarians to be people.

[Essential Insignificance]

I go to a grammar school where there are a lot of rich kids who have bought tutors to get here. But the education here is the same ideological bullshit. Sometimes I have convinced some of them that capitalism is a system of exploitation and they come out and openly state that they dont care, they are still going to try and enjoy themselves in life regardless of who or what it costs.

At school the I went to, all the kids in my grade, with the exception of a few, who were quite unfortunate, were all of the same socio-economic background... mind you, there were a few who wouldn't concede it. :lol:

At school all of the attention was shifted from the "prosperous" first-world countries -- "where we have a healthy, established and fair competition" -- where workers are paid a more then "adequate wage" for their "service".

We only concentrated on the exploitation of workers (slaves!) in third-world countries by multi-national corporations.

And, of course, a few "*****ed" and were "genuinely" concerned about the mass exploitation... but once class was over, that was it.

And this is big abstraction!

[Conghaileach]

I think it's fair to say that the bourgeoisie are far better at waging the class war than the workers are.

As for how conscious they are, does it really matter? Utopian socialists like Robert Owen in the mid 19th century believed that the rich, propertied class would be willing to give up all of its privilege if it was simply made aware of the effects of the system on the proles. I personally can't see that happening en masse.

[encephalon]

I would find it highly unlikely that the bourgeoisie wouldn't be aware of their own class. The institutions of the US are based primarily on that class consciousness, and in their writings the prominent american revolutionary leaders openly discussed their problem with avoiding mob uprising, and how they need to avoid it. Maybe I'm wrong, but "mob uprising" sounds a whole lot like "mass uprising" and "mob rule" sounds a bit like "proletarian rule" if the working class is the largest class (and it is). Though probably not among all of the bourgeoisie, at least the most successful capitalists are quite aware of their own class, and press for the continuation of their rule through lobbyist groups and strategic politics. I find it unlikely that most of the petite bourgeoisie are aware of it, however, and I'm almost convinced that the majority of the bourgeoisie are in fact petite bourgeois who are united with the other wealthier capitalists simply out of wealth interests--which requires subjugation of the working class--but I don't think a lot of them quite know the connection.

[Severian]

I'd say the capitalists are the most class-conscious layer of society...that is, the most conscious of their interests and of belonging to a class.

The books of G. William Domhoff, a sociologist who studies the ruling class, are illuminating on this point. He shows how the members of the ruling families are likely to be known to one another through a range of social organizations. "Who Rules America Now?" is a good introduction.

Workers sometimes worry about whether our employers can "afford" to pay a raise or to comply with some regulation. In contrast, the employers rarely worry about whether we can afford to take a pay cut, etc., which suggests higher class-consciousness on their part.

As far as believing their own propaganda, that's a somewhat different question, but I think they often do. Mostly because it's the best explanation for a type of tactical error they're prone to...basically, underestimating working people, and sometimes thinking "the people" will rise up to welcome the "liberating" armies of "democracy."

[RevolverNo9]

Class consciousness is tantamount to its revolutionary character and that is the failing of the working class; it has yet to obtain full consciousness as a class.

The bourgeoisie on the other hand, the most successful and revolutionary class in history, obtained full consciousness and full transition for their class. However capitalism has increasingly become in the 20th and 21st centuries a power seperate of objective society, an abstract system through we all live. The bourgeoisie are not perosnally evil, they are not on a quest to crush the back-bones of the working class, they are part of a system. This is why it is so difficult for revolutionary elements to obtain consciousness.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

In the documentary The Corporation (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0379225/?fr=c2l0ZT1kZnxteD0yMHxzZz0xfGxtPTIwMHx0dD1vbnxwbj 0wfHE9dGhlIGNvcnBvcmF0aW9ufGh0bWw9MXxubT1vbg__;fc= 1;ft=20;fm=1) they have interviews with a wide range of people, among them top CEO's. They seem to be consciouss, but hold themselves totally unresponsible.

[Bolshevist]

"Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.''

From Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations. I guess the educated ones must know.

[encephalon]

From Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations. I guess the educated ones must know.

Yeah, it's strange how capitalists were once much more willing to admit such basic facts in the early years of capitalism, but after America gained power hide everything they possibly can. I wonder if that, in part, is in response to the fast spread of communism early in the century? They seemed to start denying those things a lot more, it seems, during the depression..

[Essential Insignificance]

They seem to be consciouss, but hold themselves totally unresponsible.

They're (working class "members") all "conscious" insofar that they realize that the management, the bosses, and the "fat cats" (often foreign) who "own the company" (there understanding doesn't go beyond this) have bigger houses, nicer cars, send their child to "better" schools, and have much more wealth then they do.

Just like how the, capitalist class is "conscious" of how their material conditions are much more "healthier" then those of the workers.

I don't think -- for now -- both of their class-consciousness's extends beyond this.

The capitalist class think they're doing the worker a "favor"; they think it's "natural" and "fair"; that capitalist production suffices both of their material needs equally, in that, a capitalist's "triumph" is also the proletariat's.

For the capitalist: "it's just the way it is, and I happen to be on the top".

And that's subject to change! :D

[CommoditiesAretheOpiumofPeople]

I think that while some are probably conscious through experience, others probably aren't. You only get rich from the poverty of other people, when people realise this, I wonder how many people will want the power that they're told they want. The rat-race hammers it into your head from birth that you want to be financially successful in the future and without knowledge of the consequences or the ultimate meaning of power and wealth, people are willing to simply look no further than the proverbial "American Dream" and give it no more thought. I'm not in any way endorsing capitalism, but for many, the dream is given to them but not the means to fulfill it, hence the spiralling system where power is spread among the few, and the proletariat are dissatisfied with their place in the world. So dream, have ideas, but TAKE the means to carry them out, that's how anarchy and communism will survive.

[Faceless]

The bourgeoisie on the other hand, the most successful and revolutionary class in history, obtained full consciousness and full transition for their class.
In the French Revolution the working class referred to those not only workers but peasants and bourgeois, they were "working" because of the nature of their incomes relative to those of the lords whose were inhereted and protected by layers of institutional dogma. They would have perceived the whole third estate as the class, the revolutionary leadership did not necessarily perceive themselves as distinguished from the actual workers. The consciousness of bourgeois is often only really formed in a few, in most they obscure their own position as not being one of class. They may call themselves middle "class" but class isnt a thing of "warfare" to them in my experience.

[Ligeia]

What would happen if nobody wanted to be rich because of this consciousness?In the system of today?Would it still work?
I think many young persons arent conscious of that misery they can cause if they become rich,they realise it when it is too late but I think it is always different with the consciousness depending the age.