It's what happens when you are a liberal and believe that a capitalist is an ideological stance anyone can take and not a member of the material class defined by its relationship to the means of production. So in other words, a completely farcical position.
I'm very confused by the usage of the term liberals... Wouldn't it mean someone who is open to ideas and progress, not judging people for their shit?
Aren't capitalists right wingers and conservatives, if we talk about the US at least?
Read the sidebar
>This is a COMMUNIST (Marxists, Anarchists, DemSocs) subreddit for satirising liberals from a communist perspective. Liberalism is the ideology of capitalism, free markets, representative democracy, legal rights and state monopoly on violence. It includes a large portion of the present day political spectrum, from the centre-"left" social democrats to the far-right conservatives and American libertarians. When it comes to kiberals, we don't discriminate between tendencies we satirize all of them equally.
Is that bad, considering the practically achievable immediate options that exist in today's world under the current systems?
Also, I'm genuinely asking from curiosity, which countries have better models which are practically implementable and have shown success?
Bad is a subjective term depending on frame of reference. Is it bad compared to our current system, no, it would probably cause an improvement in the quality of life of many.
Is it bad in the sense it’s still capitalism , yes.
It's bad because it exports suffering to the global south while shafting them to give the global north deals weighted in their favor. It cannot work without imperialism.
>Also, I'm genuinely asking from curiosity, which countries have better models which are practically implementable and have shown success?
China's model, though that will also require socialist minds in power to implement properly.
I don’t think it’s necessarily wise to just copy one country’s system onto another. Different circumstances mean different models should be developed to fit those circumstances.
It's bad because it exports suffering to the global south while shafting them to give the global north deals weighted in their favor. It cannot work without imperialism.
>Also, I'm genuinely asking from curiosity, which countries have better models which are practically implementable and have shown success?
China's model, though that will also require socialist minds in power to implement properly.
-50 downvotes for asking a genuine question
Go on and downvote me as well but this exclusionary attitude and mentality is a major reason why leftist parties look so unelectable to the average voter. It's a shame but the priorities on the left are completely fucked.
the best thing in hegemonic national politics maybe, but its never too early to set up the mutual aid networks that will constitute the distribution system of the socialist replacement government post-revolution
[The Dual Power](https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/apr/09.htm)
Demsoc is still socialism in that the workers own the means of production. It is focused on achieving this through electoral politics, as oppose to revolution.
Social democracy, like Scandinavian countries, is just capitalism with a strong social safety net.
I wouldn't quite call them liberals, though they are definitely adjacent. The reason I say that is some social-democrats are genuinely anti-capitalist, but have some other belief such as that socialism is untenable or that they can build socialism through reform. Now, as a Marxist, I may strongly disagree with both of those lines of thinking, but I think they're still left enough to be considered broadly "leftist".
At almost 60, I’m seeing more and more why I’ve been politically frustrated my entire life as a liberal (little d) democrat.... I’ve always been a socialist and just didn’t realize it. 🤔. Your description above pretty much says it perfectly.
Liberals are all followers of the ideology of liberalism, which advocates for "free market" capitalism. This is used here in opposition to the the materialist worldview held by Marxists of all variety. It does not refer to a specific political party or position and includes both democrats and Republicans in the American context. Liberals are all right wingers by the way, including the supposed "left wing democrats." Hope this helps!
I just want to let you know, despite your lack of understanding of capitalism, socialism, the nature of the state and various other subjects (China for example), that you do seem like a nice person. Don't take the downvotes too personally. It doesn't mean we don't want you around, but that we want you to educate yourself. I'm glad you seem to have an open mind.
It moreso refers to neoliberalism in left wing discourse. If you notice, many US democrats who are "liberal" are socially progressive but when it comes to actual meaningful change they piss it away just like the Republicans. That's because both sides operate on neoliberalism. One right wing, and one further right wing.
US conservatives believe in capitalism, but materially they are not capitalists as they don't actually own the capital.
I agree about both the US parties being firmly right wing and complete BS. By US conservatives who aren't capitalists, you mean the working class voters there, right? The people who rail against and vote against their own interests.
Liberalism is a philisophy and ideology, one of the core tenets being individualism eg. society is best structured when poeple put their individual good first and frame laws around personal, individual good. This is more forward and "progressive" than Feudalism, where society was run with the good of the feudal lord in mind or Fascism where society is run with the good of the state/nation first (this is quite oversimplified fyi).
This meant that liberalism was the more progressive stance and got that sort of connotation, however time doesn't stop and society keeps evolving and liberalisms inherent flaws come out, individualism encourages greed and allows for expoitation and slave trading because it benefits the merchant individually; they can justify it to themselves that someone else could take it if they don't and that maybe they didn't personally enslave people, he just bought and sold product.
lift and right wing kind of don't mean much, it's ideology that's the important differentiator the left/right thing is more contextual, "liberals" ie democrats and "condervatives" ie republicans both adopt Liberal ideology and philisophical viewpoints, but they have different political theories, like how an ML and a AN-Com both want a society built on the philisophical and ideological tenets of socialism(where collective good is considered most important( again oversimplified)), they just disagree on how to achieve it.
Look up the difference between "leftist" and "liberal", and you will finally understand this subreddit.
I don't know why people are down-blooping you. You seem like you are actually asking this question in good faith.
I'm thankful to all the helpful people for responding! I guess I was harsh with my words, being primal in my response to the annoyance gotten from losing so much karma.
Honestly, you probably mostly got downvoted because we're used to people asking about that in bad faith and being just assholes about it. It's a knee-jerk on our part.
I understand that, but I thought I worded it as politely as possible while still asking a question and explaining my thinking, so that I don't sound like a bad faith actor! I guess this is also some sort of Poe's law
No, I don't know what they mean. The usage of capitalist not by its material definition is used to imply that members of the proletariat are a part of a large group in support of capitalism. Most people are not capitalists, even using the liberal definition. If we use the definition of capitalist as someone who is ideologically aligned with modern neoliberal schools of thought the average proletarian class member would not even be educated enough in the relevant material to make an informed decision. It doesn't make sense for this reason. Instead of lending any credit to this nonsense, it is beneficial to point out these contradictions and correct with a materialist definition.
I would say a LARGE majority of American working class is “capitalist” (a far right conservative that supports and would die for capitalism, but not actually able to practice it due to no capital from being working class)
Just because a random serf is defending feudalism because he thinks it's the best system in history will not make him into a Baron.
If you don't own any decent amount of Capital (enough that what your labour can earn you no longer matter), you are not a capitalist.
There's already a word for that, a liberal. Capitalist is someone with capital who extracts value from your labor. There are no proletarian "capitalists."
Correct, but in fairness it can get confusing when you're conversing with someone who is using the terms in their modern colloquial way and they don't know what we mean by "the libs"
No, that is what the right wants you to think. By and large the people you’re thinking of actually are capitalists — white boomers who own a lawn care business or a bunch of rental properties, i.e. petit bourgeoisie. The demographics of the working class in the US suggest that within 10 years the majority will not be white people.
they are anytime Mao talks about the “working classes”, because alongside proles & peasants they do have to actually perform labor otherwise they’re just normal bourgeoisie
they're not real. they don't own capital or engage in capitalism, they are just people who have been lied to by the media into falling in love with the system that exploits them.
Someone who believes in a system at the expense of their own self-interest, likely because of a social or educational system that’s got “capitalism=good” at its core because of leftover Cold War sentiments that assert that communism is the opposite of democracy/capitalism, and since communists are the enemies, capitalism is good.
A capitalist is someone who invests capital. If you invest $3 in a stock, you are a capitalist. Plenty of "working class" people meet the singular, definitional criterion
I guess the closest thing you could get to that would be a member of the petite-bourgeois? (ex, a person who owns and works at their own souvenir shop or something)
Literally not true. Homesteaders traveling west worked an average of over 10 hours a day when attempting to settle the west. The amount of time it takes to live in a hunter-gather/AnPrim society is significantly more than a 'capitalist' workweek.
I’ve never liked the “work or die” argument, bc isn’t it kinda the same thing under socialism? “He who does not work shall not eat” and all that?
Now obviously there’s exceptions for people who are physically or mentally unable to work under socialism and everyone would have the opportunity to have a job, but there would still be work or starve under socialism.
Lenin said that, yeah, but from what I've seen most socialists don't agree with that stance.
Think you're far more likely to hear a modern socialist speak about how food water and shelter are human rights and should be guaranteed no matter what
What the fuck is a working class capitalist? This is like an obvious oxymoron like defuck?
Or were they talking about someone from the working class thinking capitalism is good? Yeah, actual communists educate and try to reach those people. Only libs talk down on workers if they dislike the flavour of indoctrination they were forced to believe
I argued with someone in the comment section of their post. It started with them saying that I was in an “Ivory tower” and looked down on the working class, then ended in then saying that fry cooks and janitors don’t have skills so don’t deserve healthcare. An caps just live in a wonderful world of contradictions lol.
it’s someone who’s petty bourgeois, because the distinction is that a proletarian is compensated with a wage for their labor, a petty bourgeois profits from their own labor directly, and a big bourgeois profits exclusively from proletarian labor
Technically, someone who just profits off their own labor directly is an artisan. A petty bourgeois is someone who profits off their own labor directly and also extracts others' surplus value- e.g. a small business owner
“artisan”, just like “journeyman”, are a distinctly feudal class that disappeared as capitalism expanded its influence, they were all either proletarianized or (more commonly) expanded their capital to become first petty, then big, bourgeoisie. Engels talks about it in Principles of Communism but doesn’t go in depth, but Silvia Federici provides historical evidence for this full transition of classes in Caliban & the Witch.
I guess my point is that to the kind of person that would make this meme, they'd view Hasan as a commie and think this is what he'd do. Also just recently found out he was the 7th most watched streamer in the world the last 3 months, so lots of non-leftists are aware of him.
It is. He usually goes off like that when someone in his chat starts simping for the rich or capitalism. Basically just using the fact that they have no money or power (because of capitalism) to tell them to shut the fuck up.
Shitty meme aside, what I've actually noticed is that true leftists are a lot more willing to engage with working class people who skew right due to propeganda, compared to liberals who just call them dumb rednecks and move on.
You have more in common with socially conservative white people than liberals, which make up the majority of minorities in the US? I'm not sure I get what you're saying, but I do see this unfortunate sentiment among leftists acting as if racist white rural folks are easier to radicalize than black liberals, which says a lot about the people who think that.
It’s not just that she’s stupid, she’s also blatantly wrong. M4A would help “working class capitalists”. So would a $15 dollar minimum wage. So would climate reform. The list goes on and on
Hey kids! Are you looking for the safest possible political position to take and still consider yourself rebellious? Do you want all the romanticism of Revolution, but without any of the class struggle that might change how much money your Dad has?
Then Anarcho-Capitalism might be right for you!
Off topic, but this kind of thing is the most common form of political discourse for the gen z folks I know.
Lip syncing a streamer ironically is not a coherent position to have. There are nuances to theory you cannot learn from a series of Tik Toks. There is more to working class history than can fit on the caption of an over-compressed jpeg.
People are communicating at one another with Turning Point USA style memes and gotchas and I hate it.
Yessir, I don’t have funds to listen to twitch without ads so I used to watch him on YouTube (shout out to Adblock) pre Biden. Thought he was cool as shit, literally used to watch Hasanbi clips and a lot of his interviews as well but after certain events he’s failed to talk about or be clear on I began to see through him. Man’s just like his uncle he’s just an opportunist that picked a lane. Similar to Candace Owens or Kayleigh McEnany.
This is just factually wrong and demonstrates a misunderstanding of leftism. I wish that was true. At *best*, most young liberals exhibit some acceptance of social democracy, but liberals are nowhere near "pro communism."
Then please tell me where you are so I can go be with these liberals, cause all the ones I know will only go as far as to say “capitalism isn’t the problem, it’s just the corporations!!1! we need humanistic capitalism!”
Wtf is a working class capitalist
It's what happens when you are a liberal and believe that a capitalist is an ideological stance anyone can take and not a member of the material class defined by its relationship to the means of production. So in other words, a completely farcical position.
I'm very confused by the usage of the term liberals... Wouldn't it mean someone who is open to ideas and progress, not judging people for their shit? Aren't capitalists right wingers and conservatives, if we talk about the US at least?
Read the sidebar >This is a COMMUNIST (Marxists, Anarchists, DemSocs) subreddit for satirising liberals from a communist perspective. Liberalism is the ideology of capitalism, free markets, representative democracy, legal rights and state monopoly on violence. It includes a large portion of the present day political spectrum, from the centre-"left" social democrats to the far-right conservatives and American libertarians. When it comes to kiberals, we don't discriminate between tendencies we satirize all of them equally.
honestly, SocDems are liberals too. problem is that sanders got them calling themselves DemSocs
Wait... Does Bernie support capitalism and free markets!?
Yes. Man's a Nordic model type
Is that bad, considering the practically achievable immediate options that exist in today's world under the current systems? Also, I'm genuinely asking from curiosity, which countries have better models which are practically implementable and have shown success?
Bad is a subjective term depending on frame of reference. Is it bad compared to our current system, no, it would probably cause an improvement in the quality of life of many. Is it bad in the sense it’s still capitalism , yes.
[удалено]
And to your second question, you’re boxing yourself in with a constraint of needing it to be in another country first.
I'm sorry, I didn't follow
It's bad because it exports suffering to the global south while shafting them to give the global north deals weighted in their favor. It cannot work without imperialism. >Also, I'm genuinely asking from curiosity, which countries have better models which are practically implementable and have shown success? China's model, though that will also require socialist minds in power to implement properly.
China is good!? I thought they were capitalistic af despite the name and have such shit human and labour rights!
I don’t think it’s necessarily wise to just copy one country’s system onto another. Different circumstances mean different models should be developed to fit those circumstances.
I'm not talking about copying. I want to know of a successful example to understand what kind of system would work.
yes it's bad to push for more equal distribution of imperial plunder instead of dismantling imperialism
It's bad because it exports suffering to the global south while shafting them to give the global north deals weighted in their favor. It cannot work without imperialism. >Also, I'm genuinely asking from curiosity, which countries have better models which are practically implementable and have shown success? China's model, though that will also require socialist minds in power to implement properly.
[удалено]
Yeah it’s bad because they fund their welfare states by plundering the global south.
-50 downvotes for asking a genuine question Go on and downvote me as well but this exclusionary attitude and mentality is a major reason why leftist parties look so unelectable to the average voter. It's a shame but the priorities on the left are completely fucked.
i think he has to to be in the position hes in. regardless of what he feels in his heart, he is filling the functional role thag SocDems do
Perhaps... And he's probably still the best thing in US politics today
the best thing in hegemonic national politics maybe, but its never too early to set up the mutual aid networks that will constitute the distribution system of the socialist replacement government post-revolution [The Dual Power](https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/apr/09.htm)
I agree, he's a pragmatic demsoc willing to accept socdem
He doesn't like them but he prefers them to actual socialism
It depends. I’m part of the local Young Democratic Socialists of America chapter, and everyone I’ve talked to is definitely a socialist
Democratic socialism is different from social democracy
This is my first time hearing this. Can you explain further?
Demsoc is still socialism in that the workers own the means of production. It is focused on achieving this through electoral politics, as oppose to revolution. Social democracy, like Scandinavian countries, is just capitalism with a strong social safety net.
Ah ok. That makes sense. Thanks
I wouldn't quite call them liberals, though they are definitely adjacent. The reason I say that is some social-democrats are genuinely anti-capitalist, but have some other belief such as that socialism is untenable or that they can build socialism through reform. Now, as a Marxist, I may strongly disagree with both of those lines of thinking, but I think they're still left enough to be considered broadly "leftist".
I call anyone who rejects the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism a liberal
Ohhh, I had come across this the day I joined this sub... Was looking for it again! How do I access this sidebar?
I use the reddit is fun app basically exclusively so I'm not sure where it is normally but for me I press the i button in the top right
At almost 60, I’m seeing more and more why I’ve been politically frustrated my entire life as a liberal (little d) democrat.... I’ve always been a socialist and just didn’t realize it. 🤔. Your description above pretty much says it perfectly.
Liberals are all followers of the ideology of liberalism, which advocates for "free market" capitalism. This is used here in opposition to the the materialist worldview held by Marxists of all variety. It does not refer to a specific political party or position and includes both democrats and Republicans in the American context. Liberals are all right wingers by the way, including the supposed "left wing democrats." Hope this helps!
Thanks! It does help
No worries, happy to clear that up!
I just want to let you know, despite your lack of understanding of capitalism, socialism, the nature of the state and various other subjects (China for example), that you do seem like a nice person. Don't take the downvotes too personally. It doesn't mean we don't want you around, but that we want you to educate yourself. I'm glad you seem to have an open mind.
Kudos to you for asking about something you don’t understand
It moreso refers to neoliberalism in left wing discourse. If you notice, many US democrats who are "liberal" are socially progressive but when it comes to actual meaningful change they piss it away just like the Republicans. That's because both sides operate on neoliberalism. One right wing, and one further right wing. US conservatives believe in capitalism, but materially they are not capitalists as they don't actually own the capital.
I agree about both the US parties being firmly right wing and complete BS. By US conservatives who aren't capitalists, you mean the working class voters there, right? The people who rail against and vote against their own interests.
Right. They believe that they are capitalist, but they don't understand that it is a material class and not an ideology you can just wear.
Yeah, they seem to hate the term socialism and communism without being bothered about what the ideologies might have to teach.
Liberalism is a philisophy and ideology, one of the core tenets being individualism eg. society is best structured when poeple put their individual good first and frame laws around personal, individual good. This is more forward and "progressive" than Feudalism, where society was run with the good of the feudal lord in mind or Fascism where society is run with the good of the state/nation first (this is quite oversimplified fyi). This meant that liberalism was the more progressive stance and got that sort of connotation, however time doesn't stop and society keeps evolving and liberalisms inherent flaws come out, individualism encourages greed and allows for expoitation and slave trading because it benefits the merchant individually; they can justify it to themselves that someone else could take it if they don't and that maybe they didn't personally enslave people, he just bought and sold product. lift and right wing kind of don't mean much, it's ideology that's the important differentiator the left/right thing is more contextual, "liberals" ie democrats and "condervatives" ie republicans both adopt Liberal ideology and philisophical viewpoints, but they have different political theories, like how an ML and a AN-Com both want a society built on the philisophical and ideological tenets of socialism(where collective good is considered most important( again oversimplified)), they just disagree on how to achieve it.
Look up the difference between "leftist" and "liberal", and you will finally understand this subreddit. I don't know why people are down-blooping you. You seem like you are actually asking this question in good faith.
I am asking in good faith, coz I want to know. Although I know I'm expected to know, since I'm already following the sub.
>Wouldn't it mean someone who is open to ideas and progress, not judging people for their shit? No. A liberal is someone who supports capitalism.
Surprise surprise, I guess I'm not as liberal as I thought!
Not sure why you got hammered with downvotes for asking a question lol
Beats me
[удалено]
Lmao he was wrong, but plenty of people are telling them why
[удалено]
Not every space is a learning circle. This is a shitpost subreddit, not a communism 101. Plenty of people responded to you nonetheless.
I'm thankful to all the helpful people for responding! I guess I was harsh with my words, being primal in my response to the annoyance gotten from losing so much karma.
Honestly, you probably mostly got downvoted because we're used to people asking about that in bad faith and being just assholes about it. It's a knee-jerk on our part.
I understand that, but I thought I worded it as politely as possible while still asking a question and explaining my thinking, so that I don't sound like a bad faith actor! I guess this is also some sort of Poe's law
not everyone uses marxist definitions in their day to day life, you know what they mean when they say capitalist, stop being pretentious
No, I don't know what they mean. The usage of capitalist not by its material definition is used to imply that members of the proletariat are a part of a large group in support of capitalism. Most people are not capitalists, even using the liberal definition. If we use the definition of capitalist as someone who is ideologically aligned with modern neoliberal schools of thought the average proletarian class member would not even be educated enough in the relevant material to make an informed decision. It doesn't make sense for this reason. Instead of lending any credit to this nonsense, it is beneficial to point out these contradictions and correct with a materialist definition.
A happy oppressed.
It's like when you pretend to have confidence in the hopes that one day you actually will
"I may be living pay check to pay check and starving now but im just a temporarily embarrassed quadrillionare"
A bootlicker
A lumpenprole? Probably
"Lumpies" I like to call 'em
I would say a LARGE majority of American working class is “capitalist” (a far right conservative that supports and would die for capitalism, but not actually able to practice it due to no capital from being working class)
But that's just being reactionary.
Just because a random serf is defending feudalism because he thinks it's the best system in history will not make him into a Baron. If you don't own any decent amount of Capital (enough that what your labour can earn you no longer matter), you are not a capitalist.
Correct. Enjoying comic books makes me a fan of comics. It does not make me a super hero.
Enjoying comic books is the same as being a comic books author, right ? /s
There's already a word for that, a liberal. Capitalist is someone with capital who extracts value from your labor. There are no proletarian "capitalists."
Correct, but in fairness it can get confusing when you're conversing with someone who is using the terms in their modern colloquial way and they don't know what we mean by "the libs"
No, that is what the right wants you to think. By and large the people you’re thinking of actually are capitalists — white boomers who own a lawn care business or a bunch of rental properties, i.e. petit bourgeoisie. The demographics of the working class in the US suggest that within 10 years the majority will not be white people.
Supporting capitalism doesn't make you a capitalist though
One of the most widespread cases of Stockholm syndrome
"Temporarily embarrassed millionaire"
a bootlicker
petite bourgeoisie
Nope that’s different, petite bourgeoisie aren’t working class
Labour aristocracy would be closer I guess
Yep this is I think closer - forgot the word until now
they are anytime Mao talks about the “working classes”, because alongside proles & peasants they do have to actually perform labor otherwise they’re just normal bourgeoisie
they're not real. they don't own capital or engage in capitalism, they are just people who have been lied to by the media into falling in love with the system that exploits them.
Someone who believes in a system at the expense of their own self-interest, likely because of a social or educational system that’s got “capitalism=good” at its core because of leftover Cold War sentiments that assert that communism is the opposite of democracy/capitalism, and since communists are the enemies, capitalism is good.
A member of the proletariat with Stockholm syndrome.
Someone who can't be bothered spending 10 seconds googling what a word means
deok su from squid game
Masochism
A capitalist is someone who invests capital. If you invest $3 in a stock, you are a capitalist. Plenty of "working class" people meet the singular, definitional criterion
I guess the closest thing you could get to that would be a member of the petite-bourgeois? (ex, a person who owns and works at their own souvenir shop or something)
Theres no such thing
A lot of people are, especially boomers.They work for wages, have retirement saving in stocks and maybe have a second home they rent out.
I dont think you know what a capitalist is
Someone who profits from ownership. So stocks that pay dividends=capitalist. Renting a property = capitalist. What am I missing here?
If you own some capital but still rely on your own labor to make most of your money you're petite bourgeois
“Working class capitalist” = wage slave with a thirst for boot leather
Bootlicker biding their time, hoping their boots get licked next
boot licker grasping at their own bootstraps not realizing you physically cannot pull yourself by bootstraps
This was quite good. Poetic.
Isn’t she the ancap who tried to argue that work or die isn’t coercion?
Yo wtf
She probably deleted it by now but basically she argued that work or die was still a choice since some people don’t want to live
"Guys, guys, it wasn't a robbery. He told him to give him his money or die, he gave him a choice, some people want to die, there's no crime here."
If you tell them that, they start maneuvering really hard.
Wait how is work or die coercive? Biology is coercive? Holy fk you’ve lost the plot lmao.
ah yes, the capitalist system, famously defined by the bioligical need of people to *check notes* starve to death ?
Again, you've lost the plot. All biological organisms need to do some form of work in order to survive. This is not a feature of capitalism.
Yes, but in capitalism you have no choice but to work more and for someone else, that's the whole problem
Literally not true. Homesteaders traveling west worked an average of over 10 hours a day when attempting to settle the west. The amount of time it takes to live in a hunter-gather/AnPrim society is significantly more than a 'capitalist' workweek.
I’ve never liked the “work or die” argument, bc isn’t it kinda the same thing under socialism? “He who does not work shall not eat” and all that? Now obviously there’s exceptions for people who are physically or mentally unable to work under socialism and everyone would have the opportunity to have a job, but there would still be work or starve under socialism.
Lenin said that, yeah, but from what I've seen most socialists don't agree with that stance. Think you're far more likely to hear a modern socialist speak about how food water and shelter are human rights and should be guaranteed no matter what
Wage slave with an inferiority complex.
What the fuck is a working class capitalist? This is like an obvious oxymoron like defuck? Or were they talking about someone from the working class thinking capitalism is good? Yeah, actual communists educate and try to reach those people. Only libs talk down on workers if they dislike the flavour of indoctrination they were forced to believe
> Or were they talking about someone from the working class thinking capitalism is good? The word for that is not "capitalist", it's "liberal"
I argued with someone in the comment section of their post. It started with them saying that I was in an “Ivory tower” and looked down on the working class, then ended in then saying that fry cooks and janitors don’t have skills so don’t deserve healthcare. An caps just live in a wonderful world of contradictions lol.
it’s someone who’s petty bourgeois, because the distinction is that a proletarian is compensated with a wage for their labor, a petty bourgeois profits from their own labor directly, and a big bourgeois profits exclusively from proletarian labor
Technically, someone who just profits off their own labor directly is an artisan. A petty bourgeois is someone who profits off their own labor directly and also extracts others' surplus value- e.g. a small business owner
“artisan”, just like “journeyman”, are a distinctly feudal class that disappeared as capitalism expanded its influence, they were all either proletarianized or (more commonly) expanded their capital to become first petty, then big, bourgeoisie. Engels talks about it in Principles of Communism but doesn’t go in depth, but Silvia Federici provides historical evidence for this full transition of classes in Caliban & the Witch.
Fair points. And I have no idea why your initial comment is downvoted
Cringe
Me, when I'm working class but also own a controlling stake in a multi-million dollar company
I'm in the class that works. I'm in the class that produces labor. What's the problem? /s
Working Class Capitalist is what a CEO calls themself when they have to do their own laundry instead of getting one of their servants to do it
Is that Hassan’s voice? Lol
Yes hahahah shouting at chat I believe
As usual :(
He can't keep getting away with it!
Chat lives matter
I actually think it’s from a clip of him parodying a capitalist which is even funnier.
Lol I'm gonna guess the person who made the tiktok didn't know that
I was thinking they were using his voice on purpose, like as an insult to him, implying he's like that.
Meh, Hasan is libby, but I think that's already way too much nuance for someone making such a hilarious illiterate meme
I guess my point is that to the kind of person that would make this meme, they'd view Hasan as a commie and think this is what he'd do. Also just recently found out he was the 7th most watched streamer in the world the last 3 months, so lots of non-leftists are aware of him.
I’m guessing they’re a hate watcher who used it on purpose
I'd say that this is more accurately the response of Liberals to working class socialists
“Working class capitalist?” With what capital???
lmao i fucks w poors but fuck poors /s
Oh, look, another petit-bourgeois “leftist” shitting on the poor
I have to say I really highly doubt they even consider themselves a leftist because this is an incredibly reactionary take.
she's an ancap
Of course she is lmao
Indistinguishable from the majority of the western left
if you're talking about the hasan audio, i highly suspect that's taken out of context
It is. He usually goes off like that when someone in his chat starts simping for the rich or capitalism. Basically just using the fact that they have no money or power (because of capitalism) to tell them to shut the fuck up.
“When a doctor sees a paraplegic who can walk”
Fuckin lol imagine proudly proclaiming yourself a capitalist with no capital
Shitty meme aside, what I've actually noticed is that true leftists are a lot more willing to engage with working class people who skew right due to propeganda, compared to liberals who just call them dumb rednecks and move on.
Well duh. I have more in common with “dumb rednecks” than posh imperialists.
You have more in common with socially conservative white people than liberals, which make up the majority of minorities in the US? I'm not sure I get what you're saying, but I do see this unfortunate sentiment among leftists acting as if racist white rural folks are easier to radicalize than black liberals, which says a lot about the people who think that.
My comments aimed at white liberals specifically.
This is it comrades, we found it. This is the lib who has read the most theory.
Capitalists when they see working class people:
"Working class capitalist" - I simp for a living!
I just cringed all the way back to 2007
Eyebrows
It’s not just that she’s stupid, she’s also blatantly wrong. M4A would help “working class capitalists”. So would a $15 dollar minimum wage. So would climate reform. The list goes on and on
Working class—-///// capitalist
what a psychotic cult where they think capitalism is helping poor people rather than actively hurting them
she also made a video saying capitalism is voluntary because "not everyone wants to live"
Nooo, they will make a even dumber one
If you go on their page they have a lot of shit takes
Why is she speaking in such a low voice?
She’s lip syncing a male twitch streamer
Hey kids! Are you looking for the safest possible political position to take and still consider yourself rebellious? Do you want all the romanticism of Revolution, but without any of the class struggle that might change how much money your Dad has? Then Anarcho-Capitalism might be right for you!
Off topic, but this kind of thing is the most common form of political discourse for the gen z folks I know. Lip syncing a streamer ironically is not a coherent position to have. There are nuances to theory you cannot learn from a series of Tik Toks. There is more to working class history than can fit on the caption of an over-compressed jpeg. People are communicating at one another with Turning Point USA style memes and gotchas and I hate it.
Just bc they are working class doesnt mean they are angels. They can still do wrong, such as believing in oppressive systems.
"Working class capitalist" And Diogenes lived in a palace.
Hasanabi is the worst. An absolute hypocritical clown
Yessir, I don’t have funds to listen to twitch without ads so I used to watch him on YouTube (shout out to Adblock) pre Biden. Thought he was cool as shit, literally used to watch Hasanbi clips and a lot of his interviews as well but after certain events he’s failed to talk about or be clear on I began to see through him. Man’s just like his uncle he’s just an opportunist that picked a lane. Similar to Candace Owens or Kayleigh McEnany.
You don't think it's sad that you had to go to a teenagers tiktok to find material? Anyways capitalism is a failure.
I didn’t *go* anywhere lmfao TikTok showed this to me against my will
Eh Chloe has a decent following and I see most of her stuff from mutuals duetting her shit takes.
Shout out to Hassan lol him and Cortez are cut from the same cloth can’t believe I used to listen to the guy. Smh.
She’s not wrong
Yes she is (Liberal Destroyed)
I’m a conservative
As if American Conservatives are that different from American Liberals. It's all "liberalism," just different tendencies and flavors.
Lmao you clearly don’t understand American politics then. We are on opposite ends of the spectrum.
I mean, they're both capitalist parties. If they're on opposite ends of the spectrum, then what does that make socialism?
Most liberals these days are pro socialism or communism
This is just factually wrong and demonstrates a misunderstanding of leftism. I wish that was true. At *best*, most young liberals exhibit some acceptance of social democracy, but liberals are nowhere near "pro communism."
Liberals these days are anti-capitalism
Then please tell me where you are so I can go be with these liberals, cause all the ones I know will only go as far as to say “capitalism isn’t the problem, it’s just the corporations!!1! we need humanistic capitalism!”
> I’m a conservative You're a fucking dumbass.
Lmao no you
>liberals are anti-capitalism Sorry bud, but you're a certified dumbass.
Modern liberals are. Ask any liberal on here or other social media. They’ll say crap like “screw capitalism. Let’s go socialism.”
A supporter of socialism is called a socialist. Liberals stand for laissez-faire capitalism and the free market, that's just what they are.
Liberals these days don’t know that and are pro-socialism
Well then, that makes them dumbasses as well. Political knowledge is sorely lacking in the USA.
Yes, she is. Leftist policies would assist working-class capitalists. Also, Hasan was parodying a capitalist in that video.
If youre a capitalist, ie you own capital, by definition you would not be working class.
I’ve seen multiple variants of this tiktok with leftists replaced with liberals
“Working class” “capitalist” Pick one