The Proletariat is dead

[silentrevolutionary]

With many of the Countries in Europe and North America entering an era of a Service economy and the traditional working class industrial jobs moving overseas is not the Proletariat dead? I am a democratic socialist who leans towards communism, however I am just curious.

[RNK]

No, because there are still men and women who have to sell their skills and labour to make a living, who have no real control over that living.

[which doctor]

The proletariat is not dead! All proles are not industrial workers. The ones working the service jobs are proles too. If anything is dying it is the peasant class in North America and western Europe.

Yes, many working class jobs are moving overseas. The workers are getting angry. This signals the rise of globalism and the upcoming fall of capitalism. The revolution will be coming soon.

[ComradeRed]

The proletariat...dead?!? :o

When did this happen? And more importantly how and why? What material conditions motivated such a thing to occur? From where are profits made?

What is the mode of production if the prole is dead?

I think this is a very natural reaction for socialists to say, and even some of the more reactionary communists. Especially after someone has read Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism.

However, the more critical reader would ask the above questions. The conclusion is obvious: somewhere there are workers! Thus the proletariat is not "dead".

But if you want cold hard numbers, according to the Bureau of Labor in the U$ there was approximately 14 Mn prole jobs that were employed. Oddly, the more reactionary jobs like farming, etc. outnumbered the proles by well over 2:1 :o

It would be premature to say that "The proletariat is dead, ipso facto."

[Sentinel]

Originally posted by Fist of Blood
Yes, many working class jobs are moving overseas. The workers are getting angry. This signals the rise of globalism and the upcoming fall of capitalism. The revolution will be coming soon.

This is what I believe too. What is soon, is very abstract of course, but the signs are there. In the future, more and more jobs will disappear due to outsourcing of jobs and factories overseas, and automation of society will make even more of them disappear.

The masses will be forced to see the inhuman nature of capitalism, and revolt. I also believe that many "third-world" countries who yet are to advance to this "level" will turn
leftist if the "old" countries, US and EU in particular, do, and imperialism disappears as a factor in world politics.

We should be optimistic of the future even though some harsh times might lie ahead.

[which doctor]

"Soon" for me is in the next twenty years. It may not seem like soon to most people, but it is soon for me. I would be thrilled to see a successful, real revolution in my time.

[silentrevolutionary]

I'm not saying that it is completely dead. I'm just saying that proles are making up a much smaller amount of many 1st world societies. With this the case who will be the "class" that will take up the dictatorship of the class in these societies?

[JKP]

Proles are not simply blue coller workers; they are those who sell their labour power in exchange for a wage in order to make a living. In other words, that's something like 95% of the world.

[Sentinel]

"Soon" for me is in the next twenty years.

Hmm I'd say in the next 70 sounds more likely. Even though I admit that I'd
too love to see it with my own eyes I dare not hope it.. :(

Not before the attitudes and class-consciousness of the proletariat in the west change some. Our generation certainly won't do it, I'm afraid. But maybe our children,or our grandchildren at very least.

[silentrevolutionary]

Yes, there may be 95% of the people as proles, however the people in the service sectors are tied to the capitalist system by much more than industrial workers were/are.

[JKP]

Originally posted by [email protected] 5 2006, 07:13 PM
Yes, there may be 95% of the people as proles, however the people in the service sectors are tied to the capitalist system by much more than industrial workers were/are.
That doesn't make any sense.

[ComradeRed]

I think he is saying that the service workers are proles but they are more "loyal" to capitalism (i.e. have no consciousness) than industrial workers.

[Sentinel]

the service workers are proles but they are more "loyal" to capitalism (i.e. have no consciousness) than industrial workers.

Well that certainly doesn't make any sense! :o Not where I live..

Why would this be? I'm a service worker and know of experience that oppression
is a very present feature in everyday life for us, with union struggles and everything.
And so, the class-consciousness should have same prequisites to develop.

Here in Sweden we had quite a lot of controversy recently, when the Service and Communication Union rep. Pelle Johansson was fired basically for being active and pointing out security flaws in the Stockholm subway in public.

A big workers solidarity campaign was launched to defend him.
No, someone please explain to me how that statement is true...

edit: the guy was fired by his employer, connex.

[KickMcCann]

I'll just reiterate what was said before, service workers are workers. Just because they don't work in a coal mine or operate factory machinery doesn't mean they are sympathizers with the ruling class, I cannot believe how sterotypical that view is, really.

Just look at the growth of SEIU union, it parallels the growth of the service industry, in fact there is plenty of room for opportunity to radicalize or unionize service and white collar workers. There are also growing movements to form unions among teachers, librarians, office workers, etc...Just because they work in a cubicle or behind a counter doesn't mean they're not exploited and downtrodden. Maybe you should try getting a job and finding out what I mean :lol:

[Vanguard1917]

If the working class is "dead", it is "dead" as a subjective force not as an objective one.

Contrary to what the post-materialists, post-modernists, post-industrialists, post-Marxists and post-capitalists tell us, class society has not seen any great objective changes in the past few decades. The greatest changes have been subjective.

The diminished state of the working class movement that we are witnessing now is due to subjective problems.

[rebelworker]

Thinking that increased exploitation leads to revolution, is very dangerous and mistaken.

It seems that often the oposite is true.

Many point to the elimination of Black Industrial production Jobs in the late 70's and early 80's as a major reason for the decline in the black power movement.

With o stable incomes the black community in the inner cities was devastated. No money to live, no free time, no dues base, Increased drug and alcohol abuse...

In practice you need some level of stabiliy and hope to build a revolutionary movement.

[YKTMX]

Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2006, 05:30 AM
If the working class is "dead", it is "dead" as a subjective force not as an objective one.

Contrary to what the post-materialists, post-modernists, post-industrialists, post-Marxists and post-capitalists tell us, class society has not seen any great objective changes in the past few decades. The greatest changes have been subjective.

The diminished state of the working class movement that we are witnessing now is due to subjective problems.
Agreed.

I think this the only true sensible analysis.

The affects of the collapse of "socialism" in the East and the resulting liberal capitalist triumphalism should not be underestimated.

Not to mention the attacks of Trade Union rights and drop in trade Union membership.

However, there is just a small point to be made here. And that's this myth that the "Industrial" workforce has "dissapeared" in the Western societies.

For instance, look at this table from Harman's excellent article, 'The workers of the world'

WORKERS IN INDUSTRY, US22
1900 10,920,000
1950 20,698,000
1971 26,092,000
1998 31,071,000

That is, there are 3 times as many industrial workers in the US as there was in 1900. And remember, this number doesn't include families, children and so on.

http://pubs.socialistreviewindex.org.uk/isj96/harman.htm

[Sentinel]

rebelworker:


Many point to the elimination of Black Industrial production Jobs in the late 70's and early 80's as a major reason for the decline in the black power movement.

With o stable incomes the black community in the inner cities was devastated. No money to live, no free time, no dues base, Increased drug and alcohol abuse...

They are not better off, but worse. This makes an ideal spreading ground for progressive ideas.

The frustration is canalized as selfdestructive behavior among many, and "unpointed" rage among others. At the moment the left is largely failing to "use" this rage appropriately, that is canalize it into class struggle. It's a tough task.

But in the future we won't have to, the proletariat of post-industial countries will see for themselves how capitalism no longer can provide them a decent living.

This not only due to the moving of jobs overseas, but even more importantly technological development.


In practice you need some level of stabiliy and hope to build a revolutionary movement.

No, I beg to differ. Masked oppression, and a more "humane" capitalism, which reformists strive for, imo leads to ignorance among the proletariat. The issues become more invisible. When the flaws of capitalism become evident to everyone, a revolutionary atmosphere is generated.

The capitalist system is selfdestructive, and will soon not be able to function anymore.

[BattleOfTheCowshed]

Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2006, 02:30 AM
But if you want cold hard numbers, according to the Bureau of Labor in the U$ there was approximately 14 Mn prole jobs that were employed. Oddly, the more reactionary jobs like farming, etc. outnumbered the proles by well over 2:1 :o
Hmm? Can you explain these numbers to a greater extent or provide a link or something. 14 million seems quite low for working-class jobs in the United States. Also, how could farming jobs eclipse working class jobs? The last I heard only about 5% of Americans were involved in the farming industry, which would make working class jobs a tiny portion of the American economy.

Anyway, as people have explained, the idea that service employees aren't working-class is foolish. One important development however is that due to many service sector jobs being less skills-dependent than traditional industrial jobs, there is a greater turnover of employees and thus a less established workforce which can unionize and fight.

[ComradeRed]

Hmm? Can you explain these numbers to a greater extent or provide a link or something. 14 million seems quite low for working-class jobs in the United States. Also, how could farming jobs eclipse working class jobs? The last I heard only about 5% of Americans were involved in the farming industry, which would make working class jobs a tiny portion of the American economy. I took the number of manufacturing, non-agricultural jobs (which is why it is so low probably, I didn't take the entire non-agricultural job index).

It is important to bear in mind that the unemployment (when I took the data) was rather high. I'll try to find the exact amount.

It is strange, however, how this correlates to the degree of reactionary backlash in the U$. Spooky :blink:

[RABBIT - THE - CUBAN - MILITANT]

cant die ..its pretty much impossible unless we make robots or something do pretty much all task on earth ;) lol ... i mean no matter how advanced a society gets there will always be the proletariat in one way or another ..

[Sentinel]

Originally posted by RABBIT - THE - CUBAN - MILITANT
its pretty much impossible unless we make robots or something do pretty much all task on earth

I'm quite convinced that this is what's going to happen in the industrialized countries in the future. It will generate huge unemployment rates and ignite the revolutionary fervor among the masses.This is not the situation yet though, obviously, and the proletariat is far from "dead" as it is.

[BattleOfTheCowshed]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2006, 04:50 AM


Hmm? Can you explain these numbers to a greater extent or provide a link or something. 14 million seems quite low for working-class jobs in the United States. Also, how could farming jobs eclipse working class jobs? The last I heard only about 5% of Americans were involved in the farming industry, which would make working class jobs a tiny portion of the American economy. I took the number of manufacturing, non-agricultural jobs (which is why it is so low probably, I didn't take the entire non-agricultural job index).

It is important to bear in mind that the unemployment (when I took the data) was rather high. I'll try to find the exact amount.

It is strange, however, how this correlates to the degree of reactionary backlash in the U$. Spooky :blink:
Ah, so that doesn't include service-sector jobs? Would you not count them as working-class? Well, it makes more sense anyway.

[ComradeRed]

Ah, so that doesn't include service-sector jobs? Would you not count them as working-class? Well, it makes more sense anyway. The statistic didn't include the service industry, what would you have me do?

It was an interesting trivial piece of data, that's all it can aspire to at the moment.

[RNK]

Originally posted by The Sentinel+Feb 7 2006, 07:18 PM--> (The Sentinel @ Feb 7 2006, 07:18 PM)
RABBIT - THE - CUBAN - MILITANT
its pretty much impossible unless we make robots or something do pretty much all task on earth

I'm quite convinced that this is what's going to happen in the industrialized countries in the future. It will generate huge unemployment rates and ignite the revolutionary fervor among the masses.This is not the situation yet though, obviously, and the proletariat is far from "dead" as it is. [/b]
I believe it has happened, to an extent. Much of the industrial belt of the US, ie, Michigan, ie, Flint, has seen extensive unemployment because of job outsourcing and the rise of robotics in manufacturing. Though there is still plenty of work to do for the average human being, increasingly it is becoming less labour-driven and more non-labour.

[wet blanket]

Living in America, it does seem like the traditional industrial proletariat is vanishing. Globalization and the transition to a white-collar/service based economy is the culprit, and the result is that we're left with a workforce largely consisting of paper-pushers, real estate agents, and wal-mart employees while all of the 'real' work is being done overseas. The industrial proletariat is being 'moved' to other regions of the world where the people are poorer(peasants pushed off their land unable to compete with the prices offered by subsidized western agribusiness) and willing to sell their labor for much lower wages to subsist.

So no, the industrial proletariat isn't vanishing, it's just moving to the east and out of sight. The idea of a "post industrial" economy is nothing but an illusion facilitated by nationalism and geography.

[Hiero]

There is a larger labor aristocracy in 1st world nations, and a larger middle class. Thoose whose wages are higher due to imperialism.

[papillon]

the proletariat is not dead, they are just asleep and need waking.

[Abood]

There is a larger labor aristocracy in 1st world nations, and a larger middle class. Thoose whose wages are higher due to imperialism.
That's because they exploit people from third world nations, as there is no incentive for them to pay the minimum wage for people in the USA. So now, basically, most proles are in third world countries, eventhough many still exist in 2nd and 1st world countries.