Living like a bourgeois

[Joseph]

As a proletariat revolutionary... if you had the opportunity to trade places with a bourgeousis... have all their power, wealth and prosperity... would you?

[RedAnarchist]

Hmmm....


Betray my proletarian roots?
Become a greedy person with obscene amounts of money that could feed entire small nations?
Living in 50 rooms whilst 50 people somewhere are living in one room?


No thanks. I would rather be an honest, down-to-earth person with no pretences, no obscene wealth and being like the majority of the world.

[OleMarxco]

I would, and then pass it all around to the local proletars, of course. The obvious answer, of course http://e.deviantart.com/emoticons/n/ninjafella.gif

[Roses in the Hospital]

I wouldn't know what to do with that level of wealth, I'd probably keep what I needed to be 'comfortable' then either give the rest away or use it to set up something which will benifit others. The power and influence that comes with belonging to the bourgoisie ,however, would surely be useful to spread a wothwhile message. So I could see the use in hanging on to that...

[*Hippie*]

I would do the same. Spend what I need to be comfortable, and then think about the best way to get the money to the poor people of the world. I wouldn't trust giving it to a charity. I would organize a group to travel to a third world country and give to them directly. I would definitely use my position to share words of peace and speak for what I believe in and to fight for equality here in Canada and in other places in the world. So would I like to be a bourgeosie? Only to take the money and give to others, I would not like to get trapped in the world of them though (the greed, etc).

[zinc]

damn right and mos tof you would if you were honest.

[Clarksist]

I definately would, and then use my place to further Leftism. That's a no-brainer.

But I think that if many people were given that place, they'd just say "fuck leftism". I hope I wouldn't.

[Don't Change Your Name]

I would

[redstar2000]

You'd begin with "good intentions" and then gradually devolve into a rotten bastard.

So would I.

Being determines consciousness.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[bunk]

Yeah i would...

[El_Revolucionario]

if you mean, what if I were rich, like a millionaire, I would spend a large amount on helping people and furthering the fight for equality, peace, and liberty in the United States.

I guess we are considered "proletarian" when compared to the rich ruling class, but if you mean "proletarian" as very poor and working in a factory, then I'd say about 0.0001% of the people here fit that criteria, hey, just being honest.

[zshzn]

I don't trust myself.

I would.

[kurt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2005, 06:21 PM
You'd begin with "good intentions" and then gradually devolve into a rotten bastard.

So would I.

Being determines consciousness.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif
Exactly. Just like in the USSR, and other Leninist deviant states, you'd start out with the best of intentions, but over time you too would become corrupted.

When you answer this question, you have to think about what the answer implies. In order to be a bourgeoisie, you have to think like one, and own your significant portion of capital, and the only way to further your capital, or maintain it would be to act in the interests of your class. You don't just become a bourgeoisie, and then 'help people' with your wealth.

How much wealth would you distribute? If it was only a portion of your wealth, then what are you doing with the other wealth if you don't need it? You'd probably be investing it in order to make more wealth so you could 'help' the people. Pretty soon, you'd lose your noble ideals, and you'd end up just like them.


I guess we are considered "proletarian" when compared to the rich ruling class, but if you mean "proletarian" as very poor and working in a factory, then I'd say about 0.0001% of the people here fit that criteria, hey, just being honest.

Being a proletariat does not mean you have to be destitute. It simply means that you must sell your labour-power, because it your only means of sustenance. Western proletariats are far better off than say, a proletariat living in the third world.

[danny android]

i personally wouldn't want to have a lot of stuff. if i had an exess of things i would feel like i was a leach on society. i don't know what i would do with it all.

[Sa'd al-Bari]

I would not be able to betray the Communist movement in such a matter. Even from before I was a Communist I had loathed money and its concentration in the hands of the few, as well as the deprivation of the many. Learning the extent to which the majority of the world is exploited has made me relatively self-conscious of the fact that I am living my current lifestyle here with my computer while many others starve.

Does this sound a rather absurd reason? Well then, consider the following. For me personally I have looked in the past for something to try and achieve, Communism gave me that something to strive for. It does not involve getting rich, cheating, lying, etc. It involves persistence in fighting for the emancipation of so many from wage slavery, and knowing that I have contributed to the movement is enough for me.

Besides, one time I saved up a large amount of money to buy something, harboring the absurd notion that it would make me happy. It didn’t and I felt I had wasted so much time and money on nothing. It taught me an important lesson.

[Raisa]

I would just quit my job and use it to pay all my bills every month. Shit.
So instead of working I would do a real lot of volunteering instead.
And Id share it, with different people and things.

[Monty Cantsin]

I would....I’d uses the money to put my family, close friends and so forth on easy street and then try and build a media empire....subversive media.

[Joseph]

When that moment comes when you overthrow the government... and it is up to you or your little group to set up the country... this choice will arise... what would be your motivation for not trading places with the bourgeousis who were just overthrown? What will keep you from being overwhelmed by the temptations of personal wealth, power, and prosperity, at that critical moment when its all within your grasp? This needs to be deeply considered or a violent revolution really isn't an option.


(This question is like the Lord of the Ring... how its difficult to let go of the "One Ring" that makes you invisible)

[Fidelbrand]

I would, $ and power is important to realise ideals. .... however one easily looses one's core ideals in the process. Therefore comrades are v important.

[farleft]

The answer is no, if the answer was yes then i wouldnt be a communist, id be a right-wing capitalist bastard.

[Holocaustpulp]

I definitely would further the leftist cause and help the people rather than prop myself up like that.

- HP

[Joseph]

many of you don't seem to realize how powerful the corrupting influence of money and power can be...

let me tell you something... comrades will not stop you... why do you think bourgeousis easily betray their comrades for their greed... so then, what can solidly hold you back from taking the road to corruption? what would keep you from saying "screw morals"?

[Hefer]

ALL HAIL THE " ALMIGHTY DOLLAR"!!!
We all speak with two tounges, anyone who wouldn't take the chance at power & wealth is who should be running the country. But we all know thats not how the system works.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2005, 02:55 PM
I definitely would further the leftist cause and help the people rather than prop myself up like that.

- HP
I'd like to know why you would turn down the opportunity to become a bourgeousis? There must be a pretty damn good reason... Why take less when you could have more? Whats the point of helping people?

PS. My intent isn't to antagonize you.

[gewehr_3]

I would just to fund a communist revolution in ethiopia and to make agricultural reforms so they could sustain themselves instead of eating "wild cabbage" (grass)
and i would keep none of it for myself I would rather live on the street

[rebelafrika]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2005, 02:30 PM
As a proletariat revolutionary... if you had the opportunity to trade places with a bourgeousis... have all their power, wealth and prosperity... would you?
Not as an individual. I want to see THE MASSES have power, "HEALTH" and prosperity (and not just a clique of racist "businessmen" having it).

[marxist_socialist_aussie]

I dunno if I would. I live a very comfortable existance as it is, really, the only reason I could want much more money is to able to be more generous towards charities and the causes which I support, that would be cool to be able to do. Plus, I know this is a bit selfish but, it would be nice to atleast have a semi-permanent sense of security considering the very nature of this capitalistic world in which I live. Still, if I did, would use much of the money on others.

[OleMarxco]

Oh, and I came to think of something. If power corrupt, and wealth is a kind of power according to us communists (raw capital power!), then wouldn't we be riskin' becoming as capitalists with sheer materialistic power hoarded at ourselves if we took that choiche? Don't forget the temptations of KEEPING it, I may have changed my mind a little...although I would have good intentions of spreading the properity around to more unfortunate people than me, like a good Commie, imagine a REAL-LIFE situation, GETTING it, and the hardship of then letting it go? It's not as easy as you think. How many of us are THAT selfless, unselfish, and truely Communistic - and not just for T-Shirt!? :)

[El_Revolucionario]

Malte already lives like a bourgeoisie, think of all the money he gets from Che-lives T-shirts. :lol:

[Black Dagger]

Did you ever think that this money might go to continued survival/maintenance of this board? And the che-lives site?

[voice of the voiceless]

im sorry if this has been said, im in a rush

--but--
If a proletariat trades place with the bourgeoisie, i think it only further empahises the point of the dangerious attractive power of wealth, and also the proletariat would have lived a tough, hard working life so it would be a relief maybe so much so they are blinded by the impact of what they are doing

we are all human. the real evil is capitalism not so much capitalists, if that makes sense which it probably doesnt but hey.

[Joseph]

Throughout recorded history... there are basically two classes... the consistently oppressive ruling class and the oppressed... these days they are known as the bourgeousis... who's power to rule comes mainly from capital ownership... and the proletariat... the workers who are being enslaved, sometimes without even knowing it....

The primary goal should be to eliminate the ruling class, which would in turn eliminate the oppressed class... without the oppressors there are no oppressed... a classless society... is this not your goal?

If almost nobody can be trusted with power to rule without turning oppressive... is a revolution to set up a socialist dictatorship/oligarchy a wise option?

Do we instead set up a socialist government that has its power limited through near flawless constitutions with checks, balances, and periodic elections... is this even likely to happen when there is so much temptation to set up a dictatorship/oligarchy style government? What will keep the revolutionary leaders and heroes from giving in to the temptation to become the rulers?

Then what options do we have to make effective use of a successful revolution... should a revolution be thrown in the first place? Is it likely to improve the ruler-oppressed situation?

[communist panda]

I would not want to live a rich life if other dont have the money to feed there children or them selfs. Also i be just happy living in small peaceful cabin in mountains which no water or power.

[Joseph]

The Leninist model and revolutions are stupid and counterproductive... all changes should be stimulated through non-violent means. There, i said it.

[TC]

lol i wouldn't want to be a capitalist or a boss but i wouldn't mind being rich.


I mean if some old rich guy dies and leaves you a fortune, what are you going to do, say no?

[Palmares]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2005, 08:41 AM
The Leninist model and revolutions are stupid and counterproductive... all changes should be stimulated through non-violent means. There, i said it.
Absolute pacifism often turns into a type of reformism, if it isn't reformist in itself.

Perhaps you are a social democrat?

But I must ask you, what bearing does a revolution have on such a power structure? I do not see a neccessary link. Only if the intention is to create another such structure do I see it inevitable.

But anyway, you original question is interesting.

The thing is though, I would contend many of us already live relatively bourgeois lives as a result of living in first world nations.

Though, it would seem that perhaps you mean this in a more manichean sense.

And in that case: I am tempted.

It may well be that I would accept it thinking I could use the power to change things, but that I see as being reformist, as the temptations to become more comfortable in that position would be enormous.

I would like to say I would say no to it, but I cannot guarantee it.

[cubist]

no

[Joseph]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2005, 03:29 PM
no
What makes you think you will succeed in saying "no" when all others have pretty much failed?

[Enragé]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2005, 02:30 PM
As a proletariat revolutionary... if you had the opportunity to trade places with a bourgeousis... have all their power, wealth and prosperity... would you?
i could easily do so in the future. My education, which i am getting now, would allow me to become president of some fucked up company. But i wont, fuck no. I want to rip the world out of the bourgeois grasp, not become a bourgeois myself.

they make misery, we make history!

And well its great to be pacifist, but it wont accomplish anything. Do you honestly believe you can simply ask the bourgeois to step down? They wont be pacifist, so neither can we

[Black Dagger]

What makes you think you will succeed in saying "no" when all others have pretty much failed?

Who are these 'all others' you speak of? Maybe he thinks he'll succeed because he is a real communist? If you're serious about being a communist then selling-out working people to live comfortably as a bourgie shouldn't be something you give serious thought to.

[danny android]

Originally posted by Black [email protected] 16 2005, 08:24 AM

What makes you think you will succeed in saying "no" when all others have pretty much failed?

Who are these 'all others' you speak of? Maybe he thinks he'll succeed because he is a real communist? If you're serious about being a communist then selling-out working people to live comfortably as a bourgie shouldn't be something you give serious thought to.
exactly.

[Rural_Communalist]

My friend and I were discussing the way a bookstore was run and I think it would be a great way to run a business, then essentially all employees would be both Bourgeois and Proletariat (if you did it in a capitalist society; it's essentially how things would be run in my ideal communist society).

But if you had one person who made the initial investment, they would hire a bunch of workers (hopefully people you knew or something) and everyone would receive the benefits of the profit. However the initial depositor(s) would get extra profit until their investment was paid off.

If you were to hire new people, everyone who is currently working there would have a say during the interviewees interview. All the employees would have a say as to how things are run. That's what I would do with any sort of bourgeois business (although running a business is the last thing I would care to do).

[Che NJ]

If I had all the money, I would probably give it all away to a starving nation or something, cause when I think about what I spend money on now (books, CD's) I won't need a lot of money for that. I don't need a nice house or car to read and listen to music, I'd just take enough money to live on and give away the rest.

[brasileiro]

Very comendable;you are a true Socialist;an example to be followed.

[Entrails Konfetti]

I'd give all my money to the Zapatistas, and they'd be like " what the fuck is this,we need medical supplies, you idiot!"


Well really,I'd fund a leftist organization.

But, I highly doubt myself to become a boss of a company,its just not me.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by Black [email protected] 16 2005, 08:24 AM

What makes you think you will succeed in saying "no" when all others have pretty much failed?

Who are these 'all others' you speak of? Maybe he thinks he'll succeed because he is a real communist? If you're serious about being a communist then selling-out working people to live comfortably as a bourgie shouldn't be something you give serious thought to.
Whether the original leaders of a revolution are real communists or not is often irrelavent... but we do need to consider what is likely to happen in the successive generations of leaders...

A system with total centralized power is highly unlikely to resist corruption... because it tends to be difficult to resist abusing power... with each successive generation of communist leaders... the chances that you will get leaders who cannot resist abusing their power gets higher and higher... even though the likelyhood of corruption of the government is high right from the beginning...

ill give you an analogy... you want to roll a 1 or a 2 on the die(dice) so that you can resist corruption... your government has a low (33%) chance of resisting corruption even on the first roll because it is hard to resist corruption from the beginning... roll any other number even once, and your government becomes corrupted and its game over... but you need to roll consecutive 1s or 2s so that you can prepare for and reach communism... but the chances of you rolling consecutive ones or twos becomes lower and lower... until the likelyhood that you will reach communist under such a system becomes almost nil...

bourguois do not exploit because they are inherently evil... it is because the corrupting influences of power... it makes them greedy for more and step on people to get more and more...

[Joseph]

Originally posted by Black [email protected] 16 2005, 08:24 AM

What makes you think you will succeed in saying "no" when all others have pretty much failed?

Who are these 'all others' you speak of? Maybe he thinks he'll succeed because he is a real communist? If you're serious about being a communist then selling-out working people to live comfortably as a bourgie shouldn't be something you give serious thought to.
BTW, I get your point... i should not have used "all others"... since it is not all communists who have failed but all socialist governments that have failed... or are failing now...

[Motorcycle_diAries]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2005, 02:34 PM
Hmmm....


Betray my proletarian roots?
Become a greedy person with obscene amounts of money that could feed entire small nations?
Living in 50 rooms whilst 50 people somewhere are living in one room?


No thanks. I would rather be an honest, down-to-earth person with no pretences, no obscene wealth and being like the majority of the world.
I Am with you man!

[Motorcycle_diAries]

Originally posted by Che [email protected] 20 2005, 05:36 PM
If I had all the money, I would probably give it all away to a starving nation or something, cause when I think about what I spend money on now (books, CD's) I won't need a lot of money for that. I don't need a nice house or car to read and listen to music, I'd just take enough money to live on and give away the rest.
When it's a question of money everyone is of the same religion. So i'm sure when you got all the money, you will change your idea, and not give a damn bout the poor and miserable. :)

[werewolf]

I was born into a wealthy family. I was being raised to be the perfect little capitalist. Well as luck would have it, (as Capitalism can be) life went to hell and before I knew it was living the exact opposite.

Currently I am lower-middleclass, and I am friends with a lot of rich kids. They are ignorant living in their little paradise and don't care about the rest of the world. The only reason they are going to college is so they can get drunk and party every day. They honestly don't care, because they know if they screw up they can always come back and live with their parents until they die, and then they can get full access to their money.

The only time they make me angry (and not pity their ignorance) is when they are broke and they have the nerve to ask me for money. "Grow up and get a job!"

I could never be rich again. Living life in ignorance is no way to live.

[TheKingOfMercy]

I could live in a 500 room palace with an army of servants and billions in the bank. t'would suit my personality. I'd help charities and things, comabting disease and such, cancer, AIDS, HIV, that kind of thing, and probably do something about the homeless in which ever city I was taxed.

But I'd also enjoy the life, because basically, life is far too short to get that kind of opportunity and throw it all away because of politics. I could help more people by having that kind of power than I can typing away into this message board. So I think I'd enjoy my newfound standards of life, and help to elevate and save many more through the added influence.

Plus then I could also control how the money was spent, for example, I mentioned AIDS, id demand that I spend the money in person, so that some corrupt dictator in say zimbabwe or somalia didnt just spend it all on rolls-royces and new MiG's to bomb his neighbours.

[Xian]

Originally posted by *Hippie*@Jun 7 2005, 11:04 AM
I would do the same. Spend what I need to be comfortable, and then think about the best way to get the money to the poor people of the world. I wouldn't trust giving it to a charity. I would organize a group to travel to a third world country and give to them directly. I would definitely use my position to share words of peace and speak for what I believe in and to fight for equality here in Canada and in other places in the world. So would I like to be a bourgeosie? Only to take the money and give to others, I would not like to get trapped in the world of them though (the greed, etc).
I agree completely. In America it's something that's on a lot of people's minds but I don't see how they can actually acheive that wealth and then live it up while children are starving to death. And the rich are buying cars and houses and fucking diamonds, like they WANT people to be jealous.

Peace.

[Raisa]

Ritch people only have what they have in their special areas.
They cant live in the real world being themselves. Losers.

[Raisa]

Originally posted by Che [email protected] 20 2005, 05:36 PM
If I had all the money, I would probably give it all away to a starving nation or something,
How nice.
THen their bourgeois governments can take it and give the people SOME of it.

[Oglaigh na hEireann]

For me? The only answer would be no. The world does not need anymore rich, greedy individuals. When you have enough money to take care of your needs, and the occasional spoil like going out to eat, why need the other millions, when that money could be going to someone more desperate than yourself. Someone who can't make ends meet, or one who doesn't even have anywhere to lay their head.



-Sean

[Donnie]

If I came across a tone of money I would probably go over to a backward country and found a political organization and put all my money into it to get it up and running.
Either that or give it to a political organization in the UK.