Social Class

[trivas7]

"Social class" is an oxymoron. Why do individuals have different interests than future collective ones? Why are individual interests corruptive? What class do most workers belong to when they own stocks, bonds, pension plans, land, etc., in short capital?

How are social classes possible when people are just plain unpredictable and evolution is an individual -- not a class -- affair? Society evolves when individual interest changes, not when an abstraction called society does. A social hierarchy that never changes and has to be preserved by a political authority just doesn't exist.

[JazzRemington]

What the hell are you trying to ask, even?

[Ele'ill]

"Social class" is an oxymoron. Why do individuals have different interests than future collective ones? Why are individual interests corruptive? What class do most workers belong to when they own stocks, bonds, pension plans, land, etc., in short capital?

How are social classes possible when people are just plain unpredictable and evolution is an individual -- not a class -- affair? Society evolves when individual interest changes, not when an abstraction called society does. A social hierarchy that never changes and has to be preserved by a political authority just doesn't exist.

My response to this was so complex that when I wrote it all out and clicked the submit button it all just disappeared.

[Ele'ill]

How are social classes possible when people are just plain unpredictable and evolution is an individual -- not a class -- affair?

How is a social class not a class affair? If ten people lost their homes because of event x why argue that the event didn't effect a group of people organized by various attributes? As cushioning?

[dernier combat]

The working class is defined as such because they have to sell their labour for a wage to make a living. Most of the capital that you will find workers owning is not nearly enough to live off. If they do have enough to live off, they typically quit their jobs as they no longer need to sell their labour.

[L.A.P.]

Is it me or does this user constantly make incoherent posts that try to look complicated and intelligent?

[ZeroNowhere]

Class exists in the social production process.

The working class is defined as such because they have to sell their labour for a wage to make a living. Most of the capital that you will find workers owning is not nearly enough to live off. If they do have enough to live off, they typically quit their jobs as they no longer need to sell their labour.

From which it would seem to follow that class is ultimately defined by quantity of income and wealth?

[trivas7]

Class exists in the social production process.

What do you mean by this? Ralleys, fundraisers, communities of interest, volunteerism, concerts, etc. Are they not also the social production process?

[RGacky3]

What do you mean by this? Ralleys, fundraisers, communities of interest, volunteerism, concerts, etc. Are they not also the social production process?

Some people work for a wage and down control Capital, others profit from other peoples work and do control Capital, thats the definition of class, and that distinction of who controls what is real.

PS: I love how Bud thanked you, although I'm almost completely sure he did'nt understand a word of the OPs post.

[Bud Struggle]

PS: I love how Bud thanked you, although I'm almost completely sure he did'nt understand a word of the OPs post.

Unlike you with you singular mindset--I like an interesting question now and then.

Gack are you SURE you are not a Stalinist? You sure act like one.

[ComradeMan]

This is an interesting question. Marx' definition of class is not really clear cut at all, and he by no means invented the idea.

Personally I prefer to think of ideologies/goals/philosophies than to divide things by class- I think this is the way to deal with classism- become class-blind.

[Bud Struggle]

Classes are like Fairies. Some people see them, some people don't.

[#FF0000]

This is an interesting question. Marx' definition of class is not really clear cut at all, and he by no means invented the idea.

Yeah it is. Class according to Marx is defined by relation to the means of production. If you own enough capital to live off of it without having to sell your labor power, you're borugeoisie. If you have to work for a wage or a salary, you are a proletarian.

I think this is the way to deal with classism- become class-blind.

That is a terrible idea. I'm not sure if it's as naive as or more naive than the idea of combating racism by being "race blind". The problem of class is not a problem of personal prejudice. It's a systematic problem (exactly like racism). Saying "I see people, not class!" is just great and probably makes wealthy folks feel real swell about themselves but it doesn't change the reality that some people have an incredible amount of wealth and power and the overwhelmingly majority have hardly any, when they're the ones making it all work.

Not to mention, being "race blind" or "class blind" isn't a way of dealing with either problem anyway. It's a way for someone to absolve themselves and get out of having to be aware of social problems, which, if anything, makes things worse. One of the most destructive things is someone who thinks they are capable of being completely fair and objective in how they view and judge other people, as opposed to someone who makes an attempt to be aware of prejudices and inequality based on race/gender/class whatever.

Classes are like Fairies New York's Homeless. Some people see them, some Most people don't.

I think this is more appropriate.

[Revolution starts with U]

Class system != caste system
/end thread

(I just watched the Social Network (movie). The Napster guy; starts as a prole. Becomes a bourgie. Loses it all, so... prole again. Makes a deal with Zuckerberg and becomes a bourgie again. All too often people mistakenly believe "class" means something static.... like a caste system.)

Class is a power relation, not a social status.

[RGacky3]

Classes are like Fairies. Some people see them, some people don't.

Actually Classes are more like Climate Change, some people accept science and deal with it, others have their head in the sand.

Unlike you with you singular mindset--I like an interesting question now and then.

I don't know what you mean by a singular mindset, but I am pretty sure you had no idea what the question was about. All you knew is it hinted toward "no classes" which you like, so you thanked.

Your like a Leninist that will support anything that has a sickle and hammer on it no matter what it is. You'd support anything, no matter if it makes sense, you know what its talking about, or what the substance of it is, if it follows your team-America/status quo narrative.

[#FF0000]

Actually Classes are more like Climate Change, some people accept science and deal with it, others have their head in the sand.

This is way better than what I said I think.

[Bud Struggle]

This is way better than what I said I think.

The Class system isn't anything OBJECTIVE. It is one way out of many to look at the world. There is nothing definitive about it. If you choose to believe that that is how the world is structured--more power to you. If you choose to see the world in another perspective--well that's fine, too.

(Some of) you guys run around here spouting all this stuff as if you believe it is something that is actually real and true and not one perspective out of many as to how the world operates.

And the amazing thing is that you are the only ones that see the world in this light and then you make these posts saying "oh, oh, oh, everybody REALLY sees the class system too--they just don't know they see it." Listen if people say they believe in Class Theory--fine then they believe in it. But if people say the believe (almost) everyone is Middle Class--they you have to take them at their word as to what they believe.

Class theory is just an opinion, it is not a reality. (And neither is the idea that everyone is Middle Class.)

You guys are making Communism sound like religion when it comes to this. (Everybody in the world really believes in Jesus--they just don't know it! )

[ComradeMan]

Yeah it is. Class according to Marx is defined by relation to the means of production. If you own enough capital to live off of it without having to sell your labor power, you're borugeoisie. If you have to work for a wage or a salary, you are a proletarian.

Err... he changes his definitions throughout his works... show me an exact definition signed by Marx.

http://uregina.ca/~gingrich/s28f99.htm

"How did Marx define class? It is rather ironic that Marx, a man whose name is synonymous with class, and who wrote extensively about class, should never have defined class in a definitive manner."
http://www.marxismmadesimple.esmartweb.com/class.htm

It's open to a lot of interpretation and is by no means static.

[Palingenisis]

I have to lie about my address to get jobs. Yet the same bosses and managers Ive had to lie will tell you that no one gives a fuck about class in Ireland, yeah right.

[Bud Struggle]

I have to lie about my address to get jobs. Yet the same bosses and managers Ive had to lie will tell you that no one gives a fuck about class in Ireland, yeah right.

If you don't mind me asking--why do you have to lie about your address?