#class-consciousness

[caption id="attachment_3038" align="aligncenter" width="640" caption="photo by Lauriel"][/caption]

by Ahjamu Umi

We constantly hear the term "middle class" thrown around by politicians and the corporate media as a term designed to define everyday people, but never do these folks make even a half-hearted attempt to define what that term means. I would argue that a major reason why the term is never defined is to make sure the concept of class is vague because a true discussion about class will potentially generate a higher understanding of the concept. This higher understanding could result in the development of a class-conscious movement. The potential for this type of movement to develop is the ruling capitalist classes worst fear, because a class-conscious movement quickly and clearly defines capitalism as the enemy of all working people.

So let's speed up this train by stating loudly and clearly that there really is no such thing an upper class, middle class, and lower class. Instead, there is a ruling class, a bourgeois class, a petite bourgeois class, a working class, a lumpen class, and a peasant class (in technologically underdeveloped countries). These various classes represent different class interests. Examples of the ruling classes are the oil companies; Shell, Texaco, Chevron. The banks, Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, etc. The top Fortune 500 companies that are owned by about 49 people...total. Those ruling family names like Rockefeller, Dupont, Kellogg, Rothchilds, Morgan. The Bourgeois represents those within the ruling class, but also their spokespersons. For example, Chevron pays millions through their subsidiaries to support candidates for office. When those candidates become “our elected officials” in reality they become representatives and spokespersons for the ruling class. The petite bourgeois are the middle managers for the ruling class and these are the people that the term “middle class” probably symbolizes the most. These are college grads, the people who aspire to make it in the capitalist system. The ruling class dangles carrots to this segment; houses, cars, salaried positions, prestige. Their job is to keep the workers in line. The working class, whether industrial or service, are the producers in this society and they're historically exploited. For example, you work at McDonalds and your job is to cook burgers. Say you make 30 burgers in an hour. The restaurant sells those at $5.00 a piece. Not considering McDonald’s incredibly cheap ingredients, that means McDonalds makes $150.00 an hour off your labor while paying you minimum wage e.g. $8.00. The lumpen class is the criminal class. The best example of this is the mafia which has made money for decades by preying on people through drug sales, prostitution, etc. Finally, the peasant class is the class of people in poorer countries who produce products and sell them without any organized relationship to government. For example, when I stayed in Africa, I worked selling charcoal on the side of the road with my friend.

These elements represent the classes that make up the society we live in. Anyone from any class can represent the ruling classes interests. All you have to do is do nothing to change the conditions of inequity and inequality that are dominant within this society because doing nothing benefits the ruling classes. By the same token, anyone can also represent the people's classes. All that's required is the willingness to commit class suicide and go against the interests of the anti-people's classes e.g. the ruling, bourgeois, and petite-bourgeois classes.

[caption id="attachment_3038" align="aligncenter" width="640" caption="photo by Lauriel"][/caption]

by Ahjamu Umi

We constantly hear the term "middle class" thrown around by politicians and the corporate media as a term designed to define everyday people, but never do these folks make even a half-hearted attempt to define what that term means. I would argue that a major reason why the term is never defined is to make sure the concept of class is vague because a true discussion about class will potentially generate a higher understanding of the concept. This higher understanding could result in the development of a class-conscious movement. The potential for this type of movement to develop is the ruling capitalist classes worst fear, because a class-conscious movement quickly and clearly defines capitalism as the enemy of all working people.

So let's speed up this train by stating loudly and clearly that there really is no such thing an upper class, middle class, and lower class. Instead, there is a ruling class, a bourgeois class, a petite bourgeois class, a working class, a lumpen class, and a peasant class (in technologically underdeveloped countries). These various classes represent different class interests. Examples of the ruling classes are the oil companies; Shell, Texaco, Chevron. The banks, Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, etc. The top Fortune 500 companies that are owned by about 49 people...total. Those ruling family names like Rockefeller, Dupont, Kellogg, Rothchilds, Morgan. The Bourgeois represents those within the ruling class, but also their spokespersons. For example, Chevron pays millions through their subsidiaries to support candidates for office. When those candidates become “our elected officials” in reality they become representatives and spokespersons for the ruling class. The petite bourgeois are the middle managers for the ruling class and these are the people that the term “middle class” probably symbolizes the most. These are college grads, the people who aspire to make it in the capitalist system. The ruling class dangles carrots to this segment; houses, cars, salaried positions, prestige. Their job is to keep the workers in line. The working class, whether industrial or service, are the producers in this society and they're historically exploited. For example, you work at McDonalds and your job is to cook burgers. Say you make 30 burgers in an hour. The restaurant sells those at $5.00 a piece. Not considering McDonald’s incredibly cheap ingredients, that means McDonalds makes $150.00 an hour off your labor while paying you minimum wage e.g. $8.00. The lumpen class is the criminal class. The best example of this is the mafia which has made money for decades by preying on people through drug sales, prostitution, etc. Finally, the peasant class is the class of people in poorer countries who produce products and sell them without any organized relationship to government. For example, when I stayed in Africa, I worked selling charcoal on the side of the road with my friend.

These elements represent the classes that make up the society we live in. Anyone from any class can represent the ruling classes interests. All you have to do is do nothing to change the conditions of inequity and inequality that are dominant within this society because doing nothing benefits the ruling classes. By the same token, anyone can also represent the people's classes. All that's required is the willingness to commit class suicide and go against the interests of the anti-people's classes e.g. the ruling, bourgeois, and petite-bourgeois classes.

[caption id="attachment_3038" align="aligncenter" width="640" caption="photo by Lauriel"][/caption]

by Ahjamu Umi

We constantly hear the term "middle class" thrown around by politicians and the corporate media as a term designed to define everyday people, but never do these folks make even a half-hearted attempt to define what that term means. I would argue that a major reason why the term is never defined is to make sure the concept of class is vague because a true discussion about class will potentially generate a higher understanding of the concept. This higher understanding could result in the development of a class-conscious movement. The potential for this type of movement to develop is the ruling capitalist classes worst fear, because a class-conscious movement quickly and clearly defines capitalism as the enemy of all working people.

So let's speed up this train by stating loudly and clearly that there really is no such thing an upper class, middle class, and lower class. Instead, there is a ruling class, a bourgeois class, a petite bourgeois class, a working class, a lumpen class, and a peasant class (in technologically underdeveloped countries). These various classes represent different class interests. Examples of the ruling classes are the oil companies; Shell, Texaco, Chevron. The banks, Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, etc. The top Fortune 500 companies that are owned by about 49 people...total. Those ruling family names like Rockefeller, Dupont, Kellogg, Rothchilds, Morgan. The Bourgeois represents those within the ruling class, but also their spokespersons. For example, Chevron pays millions through their subsidiaries to support candidates for office. When those candidates become “our elected officials” in reality they become representatives and spokespersons for the ruling class. The petite bourgeois are the middle managers for the ruling class and these are the people that the term “middle class” probably symbolizes the most. These are college grads, the people who aspire to make it in the capitalist system. The ruling class dangles carrots to this segment; houses, cars, salaried positions, prestige. Their job is to keep the workers in line. The working class, whether industrial or service, are the producers in this society and they're historically exploited. For example, you work at McDonalds and your job is to cook burgers. Say you make 30 burgers in an hour. The restaurant sells those at $5.00 a piece. Not considering McDonald’s incredibly cheap ingredients, that means McDonalds makes $150.00 an hour off your labor while paying you minimum wage e.g. $8.00. The lumpen class is the criminal class. The best example of this is the mafia which has made money for decades by preying on people through drug sales, prostitution, etc. Finally, the peasant class is the class of people in poorer countries who produce products and sell them without any organized relationship to government. For example, when I stayed in Africa, I worked selling charcoal on the side of the road with my friend.

These elements represent the classes that make up the society we live in. Anyone from any class can represent the ruling classes interests. All you have to do is do nothing to change the conditions of inequity and inequality that are dominant within this society because doing nothing benefits the ruling classes. By the same token, anyone can also represent the people's classes. All that's required is the willingness to commit class suicide and go against the interests of the anti-people's classes e.g. the ruling, bourgeois, and petite-bourgeois classes.

(Where I spent most of my time)

I don't have much time, as I'm confined to using the internet in a small, local public library on the fringe of Hong Kong, so I'll try to make brief my recollection and reflection on my past day. It was one of those rare, special days during which thought and experience converge like two notes entering into harmony, and through this resonance and only through this resonance can certain insights be had. Actually, now that I think about it, I doubt I can make this brief, so perhaps I'll post in serial. So, yesterday afternoon, a friend and I went on an excursion to Macau, the gambling capital of Asia, to, well, gamble. Neither of us brought that much money and we both tried to make a conscious effort to keep as level-headed as possible. We played some blackjack, some roulette, and lost what we came to lose. But even though we did not get drawn into the motions of the game, we certainly did get drawn into the spirit. And that's very important, I think, because before you can produce a critical commentary about the consciousness of a gambler and the institutions that surround and manipulate that consciousness, you must descry that consciousness for yourself.

There is a precariousness when the distinction between inauthentic acting and authentic being dissipates. At first, I felt very self-conscious. I was drawn into the spirit of the game, but I made a conscious effort to note the coming and going of the emotions and thoughts associated with that spirit, just like an actor who is immersed in his role but at the same time conscious of his immersion. But by the end of the day, the all-seeing panopticon of my self-consciousness had all but disintegrated. I felt lost without the direction of my self-consciousness but at the same time I felt more myself, like I was doing what I wanted to do instead of what I wanted myself to want to do.

All of this was at the roulette table, which incensed my fervor because, well, I felt an affinity for Dostoevsky's plight, that romanticized picture of dissipation as depicted in The Gambler:

"At that point I ought to have gone away, but a strange sensation rose up in me, a sort of defiance of fate, a desire to challenge it, to put out my tongue at it. I laid down the largest stake allowed--four thousand gulden--and lost it. Then, getting hot, I pulled out all I had left, staked it on the same number, and lost again, after which I walked away from the table as though I were stunned. I could not even grasp what had happened to me."

I wanted to feel as intensely as Dostoevsky wrote. If I had four thousand gulden, I certainly would have staked it.