tldr >muh russell brand isnt working class this is actually true
thats basically it. I'm seriously sick of these pro idpol leftists whenever someone makes a valid critique of idpol and intersectionality and the toxic witchhunt atmosphere on the left, they simply laugh it off and say it doesn't exist.
I dunno. A played-out debate between Mark Fisher's zombie corpse complaining about vampire tweets and some gamer dweeb defending the vampire tweets makes my eyes roll into the back of my head as the footsteps of the armies of the third-world proletariat come storming in to slaughter everyone
Ah, this idiot. Likes to be an internet tough guy on twitter and did an interview video with Contrapoints just when Contra started to blow up. Spent a fair bit of the video pushing anti-gamergate lines at Contra.
Contrapoints is exactly what Fisher talks about in . Contra makes over 10k every month on patreon for a relatively low amount of labour, has a fan base that goes in the tens of thousands that all suck up to her, so she's generally an extremely privileged person, at least privileged enough to deal with some possible discrimination she might face as a transsexual when she goes grocery shopping or something.
I like Contrapoints. I found her videos interesting and seems to push past a lot of that stuff. Like one of her "characters" is a satire of those people, the radfem or whatever.
Don't get me wrong, though. I think it is basically true that there are a lot of "creative class" people out there and there's not enough jobs in academia (which has been totally fucked by capitalism by the way) to absorb them all, so they resort to this cultural criticism for Patreon bucks instead, which seems like a better deal than slaving away for a bloated and effectively for-profit university administration anyways. But blaming "them" for the problems of the left is … well that's just myopic. Communism was more or less defeated worldwide, the labor unions in the core imperialist countries absolutely crushed (our organizing base, by the way), and a whole program of Marxist political education systematically binned and left to people like fucking Ismail to gather the surviving notes like monks in a cave. What the hell are we supposed to do? Wide swathes of the left lost economic arguments, ceding the ground to right-wing propaganda for not just a generation but a multi-generational era. Do not pass go. Do not collect 1917 dollars.
Blaming wokescolds is like blaming people who never even had a chance in the first place. Let's move past it and try to engage in actual political education instead of stewing in recrimination, going nowhere as the planet starts to boil us alive.
the problem is if the woke people win, the lefts mission will fundamentally be transformed from a radical transformation of society to simply corporate neoliberal capitalism with more diversity and tolerance, and convince a whole generation of young white males that socialism is when purple hair beasts in mumus want to cut their balls off
Hey fellow leftists. You might not realize this, but either we have to be racist, sexist homophobes or the capitalists win. Hehe There's literally no possibility to engage in antiracism, antimperialism, feminism, or gay liberation without being a full on neoliberal capitalist. I'm not from Zig Forums btw
Hello fellow leftist.
We have to either validate the most base, narcissistic, tribalist attitudes of humans who happen to not be white, or the nasty brocialists win. I'm not from reddit btw
Let's zoom out for a second. It makes perfect sense that middle- and upper-class young people with privileged upbringings and exposure to the ideologically-laden schooling of liberal arts colleges have created the "social justice warrior" stereotype. But I don't see why people treat this like a problem among the left when it isn't among the left at all; they're just liberals.
Likewise, if you're a white professional spending 40 hours a week around other "global professionals" brain-drained from the imperial periphery, and have marching orders from the Man to get along with them, what do you expect will happen? Even if it's the first time in the big city, 'cuz you grew up in segregated white suburbia, you want that fat white paycheck and desk job? You better learn liberal multicultural philosophy, quick. It serves productive and reproductive purposes here.
THEREFORE: There's no reason to buy into the right's conflation of socialism and liberalism here, and no need to take responsibility for these liberals. If they want to learn something about actual social justice, then let's teach them Marxism, but other than that why even have this conversation?
because basically all of the internet left outside leftypol and a few cancer FBIs has bought the idpol pill. Seriously if you took a poll on lefttube, twitter, etc. 95%+ of them would be pro idpol/intersectionality.
What do you mean by pro idpol? Like anti-racist? What would the left be if it wasn't? The phrase social justice is like 100+ years old and was used enthusiastically by socialists since forever.
Why should anyone give a fuck what a bunch of sniveling Nazi nerds on the internet think or say? The set of discursive practices this line represents is a degenerated and reactionary one marked by moral and intellectual bankruptcy; it should be ridiculed and forgotten not seriously considered.
= tribalism is bad when wypepo do it, but good when everyone else does it, p.s. marx was a white male racist sexist and socialism is a colonizer ideology. pps. send all da wyte muricans back to europe kthxbai yeap lets just write of the 70% of america thats white, im sure the math really adds up there for literally any political project with a snowballs chance in hell of succeeding
It's bad in general Give me a single example of someone praising non-white ethnic tribalism. Islamism is religious in nature and is vilified. Zionism is only ever opposed by the left, your orange savior is a huge Zionist himself. Asian nationalism is a joke. Even stuff like BLM, which was a simple movement against police brutality against blacks was received very poorly.
The term "idpol" is thrown around a lot, but there may be no nice and tidy term for what I think you're trying to describe: the way that certain parts of the so-called "left" have been gulled into abandoning class analysis for the signifiers of identity politics, because it may be that thinking about it in the ways that view it as a single bad "thing" isn't factually accurate and achieves nothing practically for the left.
I mean it's not like that's ever a concern of the right when it crafts and popularizes a term like "social justice warrior," it's a bogeyman that works among those who use it because it denigrates and attacks the left for an audience with bourgeois values that drools at certain key words. Absolutely everything that group produces in terms of rhetoric should be opposed, discarded or subject to the keenest edge of critique to determine the actual nature behind its spread as a term among the right, which they obviously have no interest in understanding because it would likely undermine their use of it. Calling people "social justice warriors" or "vampires" or whatever from the left to attack the concealment of class in discussion is IMO a limp attempt to replace material analysis of trends on the left with a farcically iconoclastic opposition stance that suggests the person using it hopes to capture support from the most pavlovian corners of the far right. It's understandable how someone might make the mistake before learning better but in the end it's self-defeating and a little pathetic. If you insist that you must go down this road, however, I cannot stop you, but I can point you here: democrats.org
literally any native/indigenous nationalists on twitter, including native hawaiian, and their white knighting friends that call you richard spencer for simply pointing out their racism
You don't like the term IDPOL being defined as what 95%+ of this board uses it as. Ok, leaving semantics aside, whats anti materialist is a subjectivizing epistemology which lends itself to the erasure of class analysis from left spaces. Your gaslighting attempts to pathologize legitimate concerns about an epistemologically and politically balkanizing praxis are misguided.
No, shut the fuck up, leftism is when you think certain people are inferior and deserving of brutal oppression because they have more melanin in their skin or are gay
No wanting to eradicate minorities and gays is literally naziism
if youre not a troll youre fucking stupid as shit
There is no liberation under Imperialism. What part of "Imperialism: The highest stage of Capitalism" do you not get?
this nigger needs to fucking read.
THIS Identity reductionism is the "idpol" we're against. Calling us class reductionists is just projection. And the worst of it is when you reduce class to an identity when it's a material relation to production, although yes of course there is an identity built around that.
Contra is like an anti-villain to us. She is probably a decent person IRL and does seem to try to get to the bottom of stuff instead of just repeating bullshit. But her politics are garbage and her ideological journey started from extremely cancerous liberalism, so she still ends up helping liberals focus on idpol and diverting people away from classpol.
Russell Brand may not be working class (I don't know if he owns private property or is a business owner or whatever), but the argument in the video is that millionaires can't be working class, which is definitely wrong. Class isn't your income or level of wealth. It's how you get your bread. Plenty of wealthy people make money from working as opposed to from ownership, and plenty of wealthy people are exploited. A good example of this is a rockstar who makes money from doing tours, but doesn't see most of the revenue generated because it goes to the studio they're signed to. You might call such a person a "labor aristocrat" because they make a lot more money than the road crew for instance, but their relationship to the production process is that of a worker, not a capitalist.
into the trash it goes
maybe a rockstar(or professional athlete) is an extreme example, because if you make enough money you will eventually reinvest it into the circuit of capital. if the rock star/athlete puts his millions in the bank or stock market, he will earn interest and the bank will lend it out to other people/businesses to the point where hes actually making a decent (to a normal person) amount of income off that.
OTOH someone like a general practitioner, dentist, engineer, etc. really are labor aristocrats because they make above the normal wage but below the amount to live off capital alone.
Anyone who makes >$40/hr USD is a labor aristocrat but realistically you need about 2-3 million to live off dividends/capital gains at a normal salary
Basically, but the liberal presence on youtube is now basically nill. all the old sjw content mills like buzzfeed, etc. have stopped putting out social commentary due to enormous backlash. Now anti sjws have to actively find things to be offended about (ironically) and sperg out about muh woman/muh black superhero movie. The only place liberalism lives now is in small liberal arts college cirriculums/safe spaces and indirectly through pro idpol left/breadtubers like contra, mexie, noncompete, etc. technically right/white identitarianism came first since racism preceded anti racism historically, but if youre talking about the modern reactionary resurgance then yes i would agree its a combination of a backlash to SJW stuff + a bunch of stormfags flooding every corner of the internet with their memes and brainwashing weak minded teens. TBH even an sjw would agree that the right wing resurgance is partly due to a backlash against SJW, however they would basically just characterize it as inevitable as 'any social movement towards progress has a backlash' similar to how young people became conservative during the reagan years as a rebellion to their hippy boomer parents, getting mbas, going to wall street with cocaine and hair metal
Agree with the general sentitment of your post but I do think that Labour Aristocracy as a category does need some refinement; in the US a large amount of dentists/doctors are also technically petit-bourgeois since they own their own practices. I assume you're taking your $40 number from Cockshotts calculation as a monetary "equivalent" of an hour of labour by dividing total GDP by total labour hours? It'd be more clear if you expanded on that rather than just making the assertion because the number isn't static, it's a representation of your relationship to exploitation under wage labour. There's a lot to be extrapolated with the concept of rents when it comes to Labour Aristocracy as well, in terms of how you account for accreditation mechanisms and freelancers and stuff, esp with things like Patreon, when it has come to an analysis of those who make their money off of essentially personal IP piggbacking off platform capital I struggle to define if they're labour aristocrats, lumpen or even petit-bourg
What the fuck is up with anime that turns all its fans into either ugly trans liberals or fatass white supremacist incels?
yes, but we need to make it clear what anti idpol is. So many on the left hear anti idpol and think of being for socialism without rights for minorities, which isnt what it is. Its just easier to say anti idpol than saying:
anti woke neoliberalism / corporations co-opting wokeness to sell shit
anti postcolonial theory saying marx was a whiteboi so we shouldnt listen to him
anti giving non-european/white nationalism/fascism (including native) a pass, including defending native activists who literally call for violent or non violent ethnic cleansing of non natives.
anti upper middle class and petit bourgeois white liberals explaining class antagonisms in terms of race, gender, etc. in order to erase class analysis from the acceptable discourse and language of the left
anti having those same liberals call you white straight male bigot when you point out they are doing this, even if you arent a white straight male. They do erasure of any non white male critics of their bullshit and then characterize all of the criticism of their bourg-washing of left politics as the REEEEEing of muh white mayuls
I used the rockstar example because it's extreme. Those people are making lots of money but they're still getting a comparative pittance compared to the revenue generated by their work. Overall I don't think we disagree much. I'm just trying to make the distinction clear instead of letting someone mislead people into thinking class = wealth.
I agree, but also that if you have enough wealth invested in a circuit of capital that does make you petit bourgeois/bourgeois since you can live off capital gains and being a wagecuck is optional at that point.
So are you saying that the millions made by rockstars is directly from their own production of surplus value and not the roadies, studio engineers, people who work in the CD factory or w/e, and vast army of people who worked to also contribute to their success. Because IMO the rockstar although they do the work of making music, most of the gazillions they have are because of surplus value being shuffled around in exchange, like copyright on music being a rent (intellectual property) unless your saying a rockstars skilled labor is 10000x more productive than an average laborer
Their is nothing wrong with class reductionism. Social problems stem from the mode of production. Social issues can’t be solved without changing the mode of production. Read Marx.
Doesn't that fail to account for unpaid labor or labor otherwise not going toward GDP?
There isn't a single answer for these because there are wildly different structures here. A patreon page might pay one person or a company, and the amount paid might be equivalent to the value of the labor they're doing in total (or less). If there's no paywall involved then the people paying them are doing it of their own volition rather than as a strict exchange for the product (instead ideally seeing the value they pay put into the work being done). In that system, you have effectively turned the patrons into consumer-owners or something since if the content isn't what they want they can revoke patronage. If there is a paywall, then you are arguably doing IP-based rent, but ultimately it depends on how much you bring in vs the value in the work. IMO the more important critique here is the way that people have to resort to weird models like this to live while doing certain kinds of work, where the rewards have more to do with personality and popularity than the work itself.
That's true. If a billionaire chooses to spend their time working at McDonald's they still are a prole in the context of that relationship, though. Yes. The labor of the support crew is going to surplus as well, taken by the studios. Most performers like this have (famously) shitty deals with the studio that signed them as an up and comer. Rockstars don't generally make much if anything from licensing. Almost all of that goes to the studio. Most rockstars actively tour, doing live performances for crowds. Those people are directly doing labor for thousands of people and pulling in large sums of money. Compare that to a cover band (as in, the same IP, just different performers) and see how many people show up to purchase the product.
Well, yeah. But pure economism is bulshit. It was criticized even by Marx.
Pure economism or "class reductionism" may be bad but it's strictly better than identity reductionism.
Them being highly profitable for studios does not make them any less exploiters. They get more value in terms of labour time than they produce *a lot* more. A Goldman Sachs stockbroker is not being exploited just because the company is employing him profitably, rather he and the company owners are exploiting people who receive less than they produce in terms of labor time and they just split the loot unevenly.
If you think meaningful social change that isn’t market-driven can occur under capitalism your lying to yourself.
Can you substantiate this?
lmao @ your life
yeah but a cover band is not the same IP. its playing the same songs but your'e forgetting that the band name, band logo, and rockstar personalities/personas themselves are a form of IP which the cover band doesnt have
I like many kinds of trannies, not just astroturfed ones.
Well if a cover band could use everything but the musicians themselves they still wouldn't pull the same crowds. You can't really call a person IP since they're not information but a physical entity.
The rule of thumb for most occupations like this is if they are investing in commodity production or obtaining investments which generate a profit surplus they then reinvest into further commodity production, they are a bourgeoisie or at worst a rent-seeker who survives purely though their investments. If they are just someone who gets money through gigs and doesn't put that money towards the things I mentioned, they technically aren't rent-seeking or are bourgeoisie. They may be on the higher end of labour and thus be more likely to ally themselves with the bourgeoisie, but they themselves are not bourgeoisie.
For example, Beyonce is a bourgeoisie proper because she utilized her income to make investments into commodity production for her clothing lines and brand, production that generates for her a further profit. Most big name artists do something along this line. However, if there was an artist who made their money purely through gigs, they would not be a bourgeoisie or rent-seeker. If they did well though, they might by in the upper tier of labour.
personality =/= person. e: avenged sevenfold, Matt Sanders is a guy, M shadows is his stage name/persona. It's their 'public persona' which is the IP not their physical body. Its rent in the form of fame
If only that person can play that persona then the IP distinction is irrelevant because you need their performance to have the "IP."
Because people are told that those people are left wing. This is the problem.
who is this and why should i care?
Not just that, these people self-identify as left wing too. They are trying to occupy our position within the overton window and they're appropriating the trappings of socialism, including theorists and history by (perhaps deliberately) misreading them.
I've been opting for "materialist" lately. anti-idpol left is redundant.
Outside academia, intersectionality means "solidarity with all types of oppressed people" anyways.
I've noticed this as well, all the "sjw cringe compilations" are usually very old videos. Has the popularity of right youtubers waned? Milo is dead, Dave Rubin is a broken record and anyone with two neurons can see he's a retard, Ben Shapiro is a Zionist that can only debate college students (and his voice and face are very annoying), Peterson was shown to be inadequate by Zizek, Alex Jones was banned from places and is a complete schizo. I don't really follow youtubers, but there's also sargon, steven mollyneux, peter james wattson (PJW or whatever), and more bland right wingers like sam harris, joe rogan.
Marx kicked them out for being identity-reductionist not for caring about these issues at all
Except it isn't synonym of solidarity. And also it means screeching about "le ebil cishet white males" and " checking privileges"
Lol, why do you think it's bat'ko?
No it means that people like Obama have more in common with black workers than black workers have in common with white workers.
People like you conflate the idea that Marx is racist in today's terms with the idea that Marx like all of us displays ethnocentric viewpoints, specifically in his case related to the European Enlightenment. Here's some Baudrillard to help you understand. It's not about being woke and calling Marx out, but about seeing how his critique doesn't go far enough. People who go to a certain point, then get nostalgic or dogmatic, are not revolutionaries but conservatives. We have to argue this out, and not just say "You're racist!" "Well you're stupid!"
certain kind of abstract, linear, irreversible finality: a certain model subsequently extended to all sectors of individual and social practice.
aware of Necessity, a Law that takes effect only with the objectification of Nature. The Law takes its definitive form in capitalist political economy; moreover, it is only the philosophical expression of Scarcity. Scarcity, which itself arises in the market economy, is not a given dimension of the economy. Rather, it is what produces and reproduces economic exchange. In that regard it is different from primitive exchange, which knows nothing of this "Law of Nature" that pretends to be the ontological dimension of man. 37 Hence it is an extremely serious problem that Marxist thought retains these key concepts which depend on the metaphysics of the market economy in general and on modern capitalist ideology in particular. Not analyzed or unmasked (but exported to primitive society where they do not apply), these concepts mortgage all further analysis. The concept of production is never questioned; it will never radically overcome the influence of political economy. Even Marxism's transcending perspective will always be burdened by counterdependence on political economy. Against Necessity it will oppose the mastery of Nature; against Scarcity it will oppose Abundance ("to each according to his needs") without ever resolving either the arbitrariness of these concepts or their idealist overdetermination by political economy.
TL;DR: Marxism uncritically adopts concepts from the Enlightenment which contain ideological errors. Primarily this is based on a Man/Nature dualism which revolves around "mastering" Nature, a theme which was present in European thought and made worse by Christianity. Instead, there is no separation from Nature, so the fantasy of controlling nature cannot be realized (you can't get out of it to control it from outside).
Reminder that O-bomb-a's black side is his non-American African dad, he was raised by his mother who he described as a "typical white woman" and he went to Harvard. He's only black if your idea of black is skin deep.
None of this matters. The public at large thinks he’s black, therefore he’s black.
Doesn't contradict what I said. Indeed, the public at large has a skin deep idea of race and racism.
Are you a race realist?
No shit, race is skin deep at most. It’s a made up concept.
No, what the fuck? Being a social construct doesn't make it irrelevant. Are you denying that racism is an issue and one that Obama was largely insulated from? He didn't have to live with the lower socioeconomic status that's typical of black Americans descended from slaves, or much of the social repression that goes along with being a part of those communities. At most he had people call him nigger or whatever because he looks black.
That’s my point, class struggle is the most important struggle in modern society.
The fact that that is a particular struggle that he didn't have to deal with isn't an argument that it doesn't exist, it rather implies that it does exist and that there's a meaningful distinction here.
He is right though.
There are mainly two definitions of the word 'idpol' on this board, both with very incorrect implications on what our and the left's politics should be. The first is corporate progressivism like pushing for more female CEOs. This overlooks the fact that there are sections of the left which oppose the commodification of marginalized identities and even capitalism, even if they are somewhat reformist (it's not like we on this board don't have/had regular threads circlejerking about the genius of Our Glorious Leader Jeremy Corbyn). A good example for this, since we are on this matter, lefttube. Just try to find me one youtuber in this "group" who isn't anti-capitalist, even if they have a socdem praxis.
The other definition of idpol is "focusing on social issues instead class struggle". Well, this is a really laughable one. It's really sad that some people unironically call themselves class reductionists just to own the libs. A lot of times the truly radical dimension of class struggle comes to the surface when it is used to analyze non-class issues. For example it's clear that we should be against anti-black racism because it is a way make white proles believe that they are somehow "above" other people while they are in the lower social class.
Don't misunderstand me, I totally agree with Mark Fisher and oppose intersectionality, which instead of placing everything in the base-superstructure relationship, just creates a loose collection of struggles and abandons any kind of structure among them. Instead of creating a materialist and objective analysis of society in which the mode of production influences how politics work or what culture is and in turn these are used to reproduce capitalism, it relies on subjective experience of oppression. Basically people are oppressed when they feel oppressed so class oppression is just another oppression with no special place. This is why self-proclaimed anti-capitalists like Contrapoints spend their time mostly talking about transgender issues.
Yeah, both identity and class reductionism is bullshit. But when we talk against idpol in the socialist/communist circles we don't say to stop engaging in anti racism. We just don't want to have some SJWish cringe with red flags.
And Obama's American side got slave-owner ancestry, like almost all US Presidents.
What the fuck did you just fucking say about anime, you little bitch? I'll have you know I graduated top of my class in the JDF, and I've been involved in numerous secret raids on titans, and I have over 300 confirmed kills. I am trained in mecha warfare and I'm the top shinigami in the entire Japanese armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another target. I will wipe you the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with saying that shit to me over the Internet? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of ninjas across Nippon and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for the storm, maggot. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. You're fucking dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can kill you in over seven hundred ways, and that's just with my non-fapping hands. Not only am I extensively trained in taijutsu, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the Konohagakure and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the continent, you little shit. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little "clever" post was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldn't, you didn't, and now you're paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will shit fury all over you and you will drown in it. You're fucking dead, kiddo.
Lukewarm take, I think that what you're identifying is related to different posters on Zig Forums attempting to capitulate to either side of the space that we exist in as an entity; on one hand we exist on a website that is essentially a colony of the internet far-right, and this is what we as a community were born from, but on the other hand the wider online far-left movement is thoroughly inculcated into a particular kind of discourse that has some negative effects, and what we end up doing when we wish to be even-handed is play a sort of "bothsidesism" when critiquing which in itself is a capitulation to the conception of "Identity Politics" however loosely the term is defined.
Like structurally what we have issues with is prevalent in both of these spaces that we exist between and the only real way to move forward from them is to step outside of it rather than posturing in opposition to it. And I agree that the people who attempt to moderate towards the right are thinking about it wrong but in a different way than the people who are trying to moderate to radlibs are. I generally tend not to call things idpol at all; rather I just attempt to bring a Historical Materialist analysis into things as a Marxist because most of the time the strength of that is enough without ever having to go on a counteroffensive, and actually ends up having the most positive impact in actually attempting to formulate an understanding in this left that we're shunned from, rather than having to go on the offensive against it.
Idk if this makes sense because I'm just typing stream of consciousness here but I guess what I'm saying is that we shouldn't be so concerned with destroying identitarianism as a political vehicle, as though if we were to succeed everyone would suddenly see the light of HisMat but instead have faith in our own worldview because it's correct and use it to essentially render it obsolete, creating a positive political project.
*This overlooks the fact that there are sections of the left which we call idpolers who oppose