Class Interest & Rich Communists

[Ostrinski]

Ok so you're saying rich people are communists because they know their wealth is unstable due to the flaws within the capitalist system? What about the really rich though, who likely won't ever be poor within capitalism?

Not everyone is a communist because of their class interest. In fact, I'd hazard a guess that, in the West at least, most aren't. It's one thing to say that communism addresses the interests of the proletariat, and another to say that only people who's interests it addresses can be communists.

And I know of the wealthy communists lol. Does just feeling like it make them idealists?

You might say that, Che certainly was an idealist. Trotsky and Dzerzhinsky lived during a revolutionary time, etc. I think there are specific reasons for each case. I wouldn't say they were idealists in the traditional philosophical sense, but they were certainly dedicated and passionate about their positions.

[Art Vandelay]

Well my parents are bourgeois and I am a communist/anarchist and I can say that its not in my best interest to hold the beliefs I do. I have heard the idea put forth that since I fell out of a bourgeois vagina I cannot be "as good" or a "proper" commie, but then again I have never claimed to be either of those things. If you have any questions ask away.

[Os Cangaceiros]

People act against their own interests all the time, I don't see what's hard to understand about this.

[gorillafuck]

being a communist isn't in anyone's interest in America.

[Thirsty Crow]

I've heard people here put across the idea that communists are communists because it works in their class interest to be.

How do you explain those with which communism goes against their class interest?

Are they not real communists in some way? (This would seem weird.) Are they communists then out of idealism? Can they be communists then? Are they communists because they see it being in their interest in the long term?

Just some thoughts.

Yeah, it's perfectly possible that out of a myriad possible reasons, some daughters and sons of the bourgeoisie have come to the conclusion that they support the revolutionary working class and advocate communism, and it seems to me that education in social sciences or humanities might be some kind of a trigger in such a process.
Though, I'd be wary of any prejudice they've inherited from their social background and carried it into the communist movement (for example, I can see how substitutionism - the idea that the political organization should conqeur political power and rule on behalf of the working class - might be nourished by such prejudice which is related to elitism and snobishness).

Their actual practice and work in the communist movement will show whether they will remain communists. It's silly to disregard them as "non-communists, fake commies who claim that they ae commies".

[MustCrushCapitalism]

being a communist isn't in anyone's interest in America.

Tell that to a single mother who works as a prostitute to feed her children.

Exploitation exists in the US, and that third-worldist bullshit is something that annoys the hell out of me...

[gorillafuck]

Tell that to a single mother who works as a prostitute to feed her children.

yes and what could she individually gain from studying and publicly advocating communism in a country extremely hostile to the idea?

[Franz Fanonipants]

class is not an essential identity rather it is about social relations to labor therefore

[Thirsty Crow]

A proletarian supporting capitalism would be a class traitor. We have to keep in mind though, they're bombarded with capitalist propaganda, and we should seek to educate.

How come you're talking about them as if from an infinitely higher ground than they supposedly occupy (unless you style yourself as a professional revolutionary who will bring consciousness to the inherently limited working class, capable of nothing more than a mere trade union consciousness)?

[Althusser]

Transcended their class how? Would a proletariat supporting capitalism also be an example of one transcending their class?

That's what they're told by people like Glenn Beck.

[MustCrushCapitalism]

How come you're talking about them as if from an infinitely higher ground than they supposedly occupy (unless you style yourself as a professional revolutionary who will bring consciousness to the inherently limited working class, capable of nothing more than a mere trade union consciousness)?

Don't go all semantics on me. Does it matter whether I use a 3rd person or 1st person pronoun?

It's a simple fact that class consciousness is suppressed under capitalism, and for that reason, a party of professional revolutionaries is absolutely necessary to bring it about.

[Art Vandelay]

Yeah, it's perfectly possible that out of a myriad possible reasons, some daughters and sons of the bourgeoisie have come to the conclusion that they support the revolutionary working class and advocate communism, and it seems to me that education in social sciences or humanities might be some kind of a trigger in such a process.
Though, I'd be wary of any prejudice they've inherited from their social background and carried it into the communist movement (for example, I can see how substitutionism - the idea that the political organization should conqeur political power and rule on behalf of the working class - might be nourished by such prejudice which is related to elitism and snobishness).

Their actual practice and work in the communist movement will show whether they will remain communists. It's silly to disregard them as "non-communists, fake commies who claim that they ae commies".

I agree with everything except the part in bold, in fact I would argue the exact opposite. I can only speak from personal experience, but the sons and daughters of the bourgeois who come to communist or anarchists convictions, generally walk around with a pretty serious amount of guilt on their shoulders and any snobbishness or elitism would probably have vanished; however I do not agree to with the premise that since that my class background is bourgeois that I am more likely to act snobbish or elite.

[Thirsty Crow]

I agree with everything except the part in bold, in fact I would argue the exact opposite. I can only speak from personal experience, but the sons and daughters of the bourgeois who come to communist or anarchists convictions, generally walk around with a pretty serious amount of guilt on their shoulders and any snobbishness or elitism would probably have vanished; however I do not agree to with the premise that since that my class background is bourgeois that I am more likely to act snobbish or elite.

I didn't claim that snobishness and elitism were such prejudice; it's elitism that might lead to the formation of prejudice which is afterwards carried into the communist movement without serious reflection, and I think the example I provided serves well to illustrate this possibility. I didn't state concrete examples of this prejudice, that much is true.

Oh yes, and this whole guilt thing is totally unwarranted. It's not like your actions and opinions are predefined by the fact you were born into such and such social conditions.

[Lolumad273]

yes and what could she individually gain from studying and publicly advocating communism in a country extremely hostile to the idea?

I think I get what you're saying... You're saying American Communists don't stand to gain anything because they're not likely to gain any ground in a country feverishly hostile to the cause, and will likely be alienated by employers, and fellow citizens..?

If that's what you mean, then I agree.

[Pretty Flaco]

don't look at certain interests as "communist" or "bougie".
class interests can be much less complex than a revolution. an increase in pay is positive to working class interests. a decrease in pay could be positive to capitalist interests. you're all looking at things from the position of political ideologies instead of from a class perspective. "communism" is not against any american working class interests. a socialist economic system would empower working class people no matter what country they're in, because it doesn't have much to do with making more money or spreading it around as it does with gaining political power.

[Yuppie Grinder]

Bourgeois youths who call themselves communists end up in petty lifestyle politics(anarcho-pacifism/anarcho-individualism) or end up in posh academia spouting dogmatic gibberish that has nothing to do with the concerns of common people. They are not genuine revolutionaries.

[black magick hustla]

communism is a political doctrine, it isn't the same as being part of a trade union or interest group.

[Positivist]

Everybody always seems to hate considering this but people have more than simply material desires but emotional ones as well. Amongst these desires are those for identity and purpose. Social ideologies can satisfy both of them. And those who believe in communistic analyses or are moved by the suffering of the masses under capitalism and see communism as more humane and equitable can be expected to adopt communism as their own ideology in order to satisfy these emotional desires.

[Art Vandelay]

Oh yes, and this whole guilt thing is totally unwarranted. It's not like your actions and opinions are predefined by the fact you were born into such and such social conditions.

I never claimed that they were, just that the realization that one lives off of the exploitation of others, while others suffer, can be enough to feel some pretty serious guilt on a day to day basis.

[Capitalist Octopus]

communism is a political doctrine, it isn't the same as being part of a trade union or interest group.

Can you expand on what you mean?