redux

Big Money

i guess i have to clarify that my point is that it's bad that poor people are often systematically left out of the political process. this isn't to say that they are incapable of being political. that is in fact what i am suggesting we ought to work on, so pointing to instances where poor people have done political work is sorta beside the point

one of the silliest takes which i think still finds a lot of purchase in lefty spaces is that people often ignore politics because they're privileged and the issues don't affect them, unlike people from disadvantaged backgrounds who are deeply political as a means of survival. in the real world, though, you basically find the exact opposite, which is also way better at accounting for how the latter group continually gets screwed over

eh it depends. the richest people in india donate to prop up their favourite parties and candidates and bankroll their races for kickbacks down the line, the middle class rarely vote because politics rarely change their lives and the poor tend to make up most of the on the ground cadre and campaign for candidates on serious ideological and economic promises. parties court the poor through subsidies, cash transfers, free bicycles and televisions etc. every single welfare program matters when you rely on it to live. dalit voters are the most seriously engaged and organised political class in india and breaking the lower castes up was one of the central planks of success of bjp's agenda through sanskritisation and attacks on obc reservations.

at what point in us political history has the white middle class been involved in a serious political movement that generated the diversity of methods, tactics and intellectual thought the civil rights movement did? vietnam? iraq? let's not premptively pat them on the back for turning up to protests and writing letters.

the first reblog opens with the rich designing the very political landscape that everyone else is merely contesting, picking the very candidates that poor organise for. the claim im making is much simpler, that its not a simple case of the comfortable caring the most about politics but that there's often a core of political apathy in the middle and sustained political engagement at both ends. i'm saying that the depoliticisation of the underclass isn't representative of some global, transhistorical trend of movements and the privileged of all types are more politicised in general. in the real world i think it kind of depends.

well tbc i was responding specifically to your statement about the us, which is where i organize and hear this sentiment a lot, but can speak from experience that it's not really true! or, sure, it can depend if we want to avoid absolutes, but i think this sort of fantasy allows us to get away with not making it come true. i also think it's a bit optimistic even to assume that the poor and the rich are somehow equally political with only the middle being disengaged. again, i don't really think this can account for much