You must log in or register to comment.
These kids must be in a Maoist English dual immersion program. Good for them
/uj
I’ve never understood this because labor aristocracy has a simple, concise definition:
The labour aristocracy is that section of the international working class whose privileged position in the lucrative job markets opened up by imperialism guarantees its receipt of wages approaching or exceeding the per capita value created by the working class as a whole.
If you make more than (PPP 2007 USD) $1.50 / hour, or ~$250 / month, then congrats, you are in the minority of the world’s workers, are getting paid more than the average price of labor power worldwide, and are technically part of the labor aristocracy, regardless of your ideology.
There’s a book called How Capitalism Ends by a guy named Steve Paxton, it’s that largely libbed up brand of trot brit socialism but it did have some good points interspersed, one in particular I’m thinking of here is an argument for making a distinction between a “technocracy” and the rest of the working class:
It’s important to note that the technocracy are not excluded from the proletariat because they earn too much money, or because they enjoy a large degree of autonomy in their work. It is the effective (though incomplete) control they exercise over productive assets by virtue of their technical knowledge that separates them from the proletariat. They make largely autonomous decisions about how and where productive assets will be deployed, and the expert knowledge which gives them the ability to do so puts them in a different relationship to both the means of production and to the bourgeoisie than that of the proletarian. At the same time, they do not enjoy the full range of ownership rights over the assets they control – they cannot sell or bequeath them for example. This limitation sets them apart from the petty-bourgeoisie.
I kind of like this distinction in this context, might be more prudent than labor aristocrat in describing some folks
That’s the Professional Managerial Class for ye, guys, mere stewards of capital
Waiiiiit a sec, the value created =/= the wage, no?
So the line would definitely be higher than that.
I’m not sure I follow your question, but capitalists don’t pay the total value (IE wages + surplus value), they only pay wages, and there is an international average price of labor power, especially in this globalized world where capital and productive equipment can move freely between borders.
I’m saying the definition you gave refers to “per capita value produced by the working class as a whole” but then you cite median household income (I’m guessing, since the source I found says ~2920/yr for that) as the cutoff value for labor aristocracy vs not. Those aren’t the same thing.
I didn’t cite median household income. That number is the average wage rate for male workers (in PPP 2007 USD dollars) according to the ILO.
Okay, I guessed since you didn’t say, but still, wages don’t include the entire “value produced by the working class” so I don’t understand how it applies; like how is “adjusted average wage rate for male workers” a better way to measure said value, than say, ppp adjusted GDP per capita (or other measures that incorporate more than just wages)?
okay, GDP is a shitty measure, but the core point is that the measure you cite doesn’t line up with the supposedly very basic straightforward definition you offered. That’s what I don’t get.
Edit: and also, I’m talking about global gdp per capita, not gdp per capita in each country, so unequal distribution wouldn’t even matter, as long as the total amount figure is still meaningful.
I’m going to be nitpicky and say that imperialism isn’t really creating a lucrative job market here, it’s just that the hegemony of the dollar means that workers receive more than what their labor is worth on a global scale. Job opportunities are actually still really scarce in the US as of recent. Though US workers can afford to buy more commodities, I’m fairly certain the majority of said commodities are also inflated in price here in the US. 10 dollars is hours of work for your average worker on a global scale, but it’s the price of a burger in some restaurants here.
The number I gave above is inflation adjusted. To be more specific showing the divide, these are the numbers from the ILO.
According to the ILO, after inflation adjustments, global north workers make on average ~11x more than global south workers. They’re essentially working with capital and productive technology from the 21st century, but getting paid wages from the 1800s.
Inflation-adjusted Average Wage Rates for male workers in 2007 _ Monthly wage for OECD workers $2,378 Monthly wage for non-OECD workers $253 Hourly wage for OECD workers $17 Hourly wage for non-OECD workers $1.50 Factoral Difference between OECD and non-OECD wages 11 Median Global Hourly wage $9.25 Sorry, let me clarify. I didn’t mean inflated to refer to actual inflation, I just meant that due to the hegemonic, high value of the dollar that most goods in the US are overpriced and US workers pay more than they should for them
Ah I think I follow. So PPP-adjusted stands for (purchasing-power-parity-adjusted), and it means that it normalizes the cost of a broad basket of goods. So inflation-adjusted in this context means prices normalized across countries, not $$$-inflation over time.
edit: whenever we post these, that’s usually the argument, that things cost more in the global north. But these figures already adjust for that, otherwise the ratio would be probably 1000s of times more.
Makes sense I guess
So if I donate all of the money I make and only keep $1.50/hour only then I can call myself a real communist?
Doesn’t seem practical given the fact that US lodging and almost all consumer goods are also more expensive than other countries afaik
This is not a value judgement. This is a bread and butter argument: global south workers are the primary source of surplus value in the 21st century. That is a fact outside of whatever label you want to give yourself.
I recommend reading John Smith - Imperialism in the 21st century, Zak Cope - Divided world divided class, or for a more introductory book, Jason Hickle - The Divide.
It illustrates how imperialism benefits the poor in the imperial core, but that doesn’t seem novel or controversial, and the use I see most frequently – writing off basically everyone in the imperial core in terms of socialist potential – seems way off base.
I don’t think the main reason socialism isn’t widely popular among the poor of the U.S. is that they’re relatively better off than the poor in the global south. This country had bigger leftist currents a century ago when it was openly imperialistic, after all, to say nothing of the decades following WWII. I think the reason is more along the lines of the intervening century of state repression and propaganda.
Going to copy this here because it’s spot on.
I think the “labor aristocracy” is very real, but the usual reasoning it’s used to defend is (incorrectly) fatalistic. If you read into history you’ll see many, many examples of militant socialist movements inside the US. Actual violence in the name of organized labor was much more common than it is today in the US. Something else happened other than the United States’ imperializing of other countries, because it’s been doing that for ages. It should be our goal to figure out what exactly that is
haha, yeah just like me fr fr nothing sus Ohio I’m rizzmaxing and youth pilledHell yeah, but can you not dox me next time?
We love our zoomer vanguard folks
Everyone on Hexbear is a liberal, except for me
There’s only one true leftist on hexbear, and we all have to share them
that can’t be right, because everyone on hexbear is a liberal except for ME
i dont know how to word this well, but this meme feels kinda sus - the POC emojis with the white kids is classic trope to imply that any POC on a leftist forum are actually white kids LARPing, which feels kinda shitty in the context of Hexbear already having problems with POC folk feeling sidelined
just saying
I stole it from somewhere else, and I didn’t notice the emojis but yeah, I’ve edited out the emojis now
thank you
I didn’t notice initially, yea that does seem kinda gross.
Kid forgot to sign it with
, smh what a lib, Lngl a lot of the stuff I see on here does make me feel pretty old
Everyone here is a kkkkrackkker except for me
I wish I had a 17” laptop
Maoist vernacular English, a rare W for them.
anarKKKiddies
this is a kind-spirited joke pls no ban
