These careers create knowledge as opposed to physical products that a laborer does, are they also considered workers or are they in their own class?

What about programmers, engineers, designers, etc?

  • Free PalestineA
    link
    73 years ago

    rule of thumb, if the career produces something (anything) and doesn’t rely on the exploitation of the means of production, people of that career would be considered workers. There are exceptions to that, but that’s where we have to get into arguments of semantics.

    • @Shaggy0291
      link
      2
      edit-2
      3 years ago

      The difference between proletarians and artisans is more than a matter of semantics, I’d say. Honestly it depends on what the actual purpose of the discussion is. Artisans are a relevant part of the economic landscape, the nature of whose work makes them resilient to the accumulation of capital. These figures, professional illustrators, hairdressers, tattoo artists, various kinds of tradesmen etc are still very important to the overall function of the economy, and at the same time also a potential source of confusion that can be opportunistically manipulated to muddy the discourse. It is important we understand the actual nature of their relations of service and production so we can clarify their actual role and prevent such confusion. We cannot afford sloppiness at any point in our analysis; if it isn’t all encompassing then it leaves points of weakness that are then subject to subversive attacks.

  • lemmygrabber
    link
    53 years ago

    They are. Same with programmers, engineers and designers. Intellectual labour is labour too. Hope that helps.

  • @Shaggy0291
    link
    43 years ago

    They are modulators of the rate of surplus value, but their mental labour is appropriated on a wage basis, rendering them proletarians.