Why do people romanticize the working class? They're largely stupid, illiterate, malleable, bigoted, and religious

>implying religious choice impacts your ability to gather wealth

>Why do people romanticize the working class?
Did.

Anyway, it was just a particular case of Christian idolatry of the poor, nothing you should dedicate too much grey matter about.

Most Jews are atheists

I was raised Christian and they went on and on about the apocalypse. Trust me, I'd rather the Earth were twice its size and the environment was large enough to easily recover from this onslaught, but scientists are making some disturbing forecasts. I try to ignore them now that its gotten so bad.
Things are changing, boyo. Anything is possible.
And?

>>Bill Gates is an atheist.
Sends his kids to church.
>>Mark Zuckerberg is an atheist.
And Jewish.

>Things are changing, boyo. Anything is possible.
Except communism.

Being religious does make it much easier to gather wealth because you are less likely to be a degenerate idiot who spends all his money on alcohol and looking for women and more likely to get married and settle down.

>Sends his kids to church.
Gonna need a source on this.

>And Jewish.
Born jewish, become an atheist later in life.

Do you have a single fact to back that up?

>"Except my perceptions of what communism is"

There's dozens of different shades of the socialist base. Though I can only recommend the anti-capitalist varieties

>religious people aren't degenerates

Circumcision
Daughter brides
Pedophilia
Repressed homosexuality
Funneling funds
Fake tax breaks
Manipulation of the poor
Purging of radical thought

>>Gonna need a source on this.
>The moral systems of religion, I think, are superimportant. We've raised our kids in a religious way; they've gone to the Catholic church that Melinda goes to and I participate in.

>Born jewish, become an atheist later in life.
>>a commenter asked him: Aren’t you an atheist?
>>Zuckerberg identified himself as an atheist for years, but on Facebook on Christmas he wrote back: “No. I was raised Jewish and then I went through a period where I questioned things, but now I believe religion is very important.”

>become an atheist later in life
That's what they want you to believe.
As they say, a baptized Jew is like a cured horse or a pardoned thief.

how could a variety of socialism not be anti-capitalism and still be socialism??
even milquetoast demsoc is slightly worse for business

He's saying that because he's running for president next election cycle, fool.

It's a fact that wealthier people tend to be more religious and moral than working class people

ugh fucking technocrat would-be demagogue
unwilling to commit to anything at all for fear of alienating potential ad clicks
I guess it's just as disingenuous as a CEO publically supporting some cause though

>implying capital doesn't have theological and eschatological implications

transhumanism has already been incorporated into the quasi religious ideology of the ruling classes, see the ted talk circuit for example. It's funny how the reasonable educated liberals who dismiss even mild social democratic reforms as unfeasible and utopian are nonetheless convinced tech corps are gonna make everyone immortal. The 'singularity' is the apotheosis of technics and instrumental rationality. Nick Land is probably the last honest liberal on earth, though he misses something very important about Capital, that is, its infinite banality.

and who controls the popular media? bourgeoisie class interests stupid. midbrow outlets like TED, NYT, WaPo, the Atlantic, the economist are also mechanisms of ideological reproduction, probably even more mendacious than their downmarket equivalents. They are designed to trick you into thinking your interests are one with the elites'. in order to achieve this, they flatter your petty bourgeoisie ego- you are a rational centrist, you are above it all, you can count yourself amongst the educated classes- it's all bullshit of course

Every atheist praises religion to avoid confrotations.
I do that quite alot.
Since i've read the holy bible, i get along very well with christians.
But believe me, the backlash an atheist can face when in a lower social status is terrible.
Specially if he doesn't know how to behave.

>as a class they objectively hold the power to bring society to its knees.

But why would they want to? Socialists/communists have this weird belief that working class people want to rule over society and make crucial decisions. They don't. Most people just want to live their life, go home and watch football and have beer. They don't want to organize and hold town hall meetings and debate on how money and resources are distributed. I'm not saying they're too dumb to do that - I'm saying they're too smart to desire such banality. The working class would enjoy higher wages, more time off, and benefits, but in general they want to keep their cultural traditions and ways of living. They are often turned off by most socialist ideology because most socialists criticize everything about society and want to totally dismantle it....Working class people often don't share that viewpoint.

Source? Examples? C

That doesn't make him a theist. I'm talking about Gates.

>Examples?
Why would you specifically request anecdotes?

The Social democrats and progressives practice a mild sort of socialism.
When capitalism collapses the rightwingers claim its the socialist factors doing it.
It's a dumb game and we should stop playing it.

>and always will be
You come from the future?

>When capitalism collapses
That never happened though.

>Why do people romanticize the working class?

Nobody romanticizes the working class anymore. They are arguably the most hated group in Western nations. If a society isn't progressive enough, or if the wrong candidate wins, it is always blamed on the uneducated, working class rednecks. The primary reason why people support strong amounts of immigration, is to dismantle the working class's influence as a voting bloc and make them irrelevant.

It does, though. Having the self discipline to overcome petty desires helps in the business/academic world, believe it or not. And elite families have been religious for many generations. If I even spoke out in blasphemy once in my house growing up I would have been disowned on the spot, and rightfully so.

The growing athiest movement is also largely working class people lashing out at religious elite, in some attempt to appear intellectual and sophisticated. It becomes apparent when you take a step back and actually look at the big picture.

>Why do people romanticize the working class?
because despiting all of that you have said that working class became aware of that at some point and tried to claim opportunities for a better future. Off course, not all working class people are aware, some of them are fucking sheeps.

Because you're pulling this out of the thin air.
And maybe, just maybe i wanna know where did you get that idea.

I just wanna know where people get the idea that being religious increases the odd of being wealthier and more intelligent in relative numbers.

Rowling is the epitome of neoliberalism. It's not about romanticising the working class. Marx actually warned against doing that in his critique of the Gotha program.

>Labor is not the source of all wealth. Nature is just as much the source of use values (and it is surely of such that material wealth consists!) as labor, which itself is only the manifestation of a force of nature,
human labor power. the above phrase is to be found in all children's primers and is correct insofar as it is
implied that labor is performed with the appurtenant subjects and instruments. But a socialist program
cannot allow such bourgeois phrases to pass over in silence the conditions that lone give them meaning.
And insofar as man from the beginning behaves toward nature, the primary source of all instruments and
subjects of labor, as an owner, treats her as belonging to him, his labor becomes the source of use values,
therefore also of wealth. The bourgeois have very good grounds for falsely ascribing supernatural
creative power to labor; since precisely from the fact that labor depends on nature it follows that the man
who possesses no other property than his labor power must, in all conditions of society and culture, be
the slave of other men who have made themselves the owners of the material conditions of labor. He can
only work with their permission, hence live only with their permission.

The political economy is an elaborate game that presents itself as objective reality. If we lived in a society were everything was determined through poker games, you would accuse the people who are against the tyranny of the poker economy of being unfamiliar with the rules of poker.

>wealthy people tend to be moral

Check yourself before you wreck yourself

I'm not that guy. I'm just saying that anyone can come up with isolated examples; you should be requesting statistical research.

I'm pretty sure that religiosity and socioeconomic class are negatively correlated but the US is probably a weird exception.

*weird in that I suspect wealthier Americans aren't less religious (the middle class probably is though)

Oh baby boy.
Tell that to people who lived through the 1930s and who are feeling the pinch of the 2008 crash
Let alone all the recessions.

If capitalism has collapsed as you say, then why aren't we living under communism?

What in the hell are you reading? Anything?

it's already happening. the tech bubble, the real estate bubble, the ecological crisis and the imminent destruction of the liberal world order. The abstractions of the political economy are phantoms that occlude the true, brutal nature of our society, which is in the last instance a tyranny of property holders based on the crude exercise of power. We live under a permanent state of exception.

The great depression was a derivative of government intervention, not some flaw in the free market.

>Having the self discipline to overcome petty desires helps in the business/academic world
You sure it can't be taught by an average working class family?

>And elite families have been religious for many generations.
Source and examples.
> If I even spoke out in blasphemy once in my house growing up I would have been disowned on the spot, and rightfully so.
Man, that's tough life isn't it?
>The growing athiest movement is also largely working class people lashing out at religious elite, in some attempt to appear intellectual and sophisticated. It becomes apparent when you take a step back and actually look at the big picture.
Sounds like a nice reverse Illuminati plot.
Also, source (which will be difficult to gather i assume) to back that up.
And, atheism is not about taking revenge on god or nihilism, hedonism, w/e.

Here's a problem: when they're making these broad assumptions, they need statistics to back that up, otherwise they just look like fools trying to speculating what's happening.

It's true religiosity and socieconomic status are negatively correlated, but that's not because being an atheist makes you smarter, it's more of the citizens are being provided a comfortable life without a normalization agenda and are giving some time to think about it and coming to their own conclusions.

Want a counterexample of this?
Vietnam is one of the most atheist countries, yet, largely undeveloped.
that's because religion was outlawed, and it's very likely that citizens still practice small cults.

Religion brings comfort in dark times, by make certain promises. So they get attached to that idea.

However, it's a hollow comfort.

this is a verbal dispute about whether collapse has to be total and final, isn't it?

socialism or barbarism. Capital is a singularly jealous god. We will destroy capital or capital will destroy us.

Is this a club of rich fellows, who complaining about the working class?
Are you the Bourgeoisie authoritarians ?

The 'free market' has always been a product of state intervention. Private property and alienated labor are enforced by the state. Weren't striking workers suppressed by machine gun fire? the meagre concessions of the welfare state were the result of class struggle, of a bourgeoisie that felt genuinely threatened by proletarian mobilisation. Your ideal free market could only function in a world inhabited only by commodities, a world with no humans in it.

financial sectors add no value

fuck em

You're not wrong

Damn, roastie. You're definitely b8ing. Just go back to tumblr.

the bourgeoisie create nothing of value

fuck em

the bourgeoisie are the reason you're not a peasant under feudalism right now

Striking workers were surpresseed because they would try to prevent work from occurring with scabs. I'm no corporate toady, nor anti-worker, but the idea that low-caste people and proles could break the collective action dilemma that inhabits their relationship with the capitalists is ridiculous. Workers have no teeth without the tacit or explicit support of a body with a comparative advantage in violence.

The change you want will come through democracy or not at all. That's my opinion.

Statism and capitalism coexist. There's no separating them.

I never said anything about it ending upon collapsing. Idiots still pick it up and start playing the dirty game again. Just a typical troll arguing.

>Implying the peasants and working class didn't put their lives on the lines to aid the revolution
Typical bourgie scumbo

>gets asked "Do you have a source for that?"
>Tautologically repeats the first claim

wew

it's weird how, considering how workers have failed to solve the collective action problem, capitalists seem to have found a solution to their own collective action problem in the form of the welfare state, which makes living and working collections tolerable enough to perpetually forestall a revolution at the expense of the total maximization of profit

>I never said anything about it ending upon collapsing.
no, but your interlocutor clearly thought that's what "collapse" means

>socialists want to diminish the power of the rich capitalists and bourgeoisie class
>they look to the working class to turn on the rich and restructure society
>but the working class stupidly goes conservative and votes for stuff like trump and brexit
>socialists realize the only chance they have is to import voters from the third world

>socialist are tragic misunderstood good guys who just want to 'muh helpin people'

Lol, that faggy name makes me think you're some overweight partimer housewife that has random ugly diy decor slathered over her house. Pic related.

bourgeoisie democracy has always been a sham, though. The bourgeoisie order was a product of revolutionary violence, primitive accumulation cannot be anything but violent and the institution of private property can only be maintained through the tacit or explicit support of a body with a comparative advantage in violence. Apologists of the existing order deny the violence inherent in the system.

They don't need to "perpetually" forestall a revolution, they only need to forestall it long enough until they have moved all their assets to somewhere overseas where it's legal to exploit slave labor.

>importing conservatives to outvote conservatives
what did they mean by this?

they don't need to, but they clearly have
the revolution isn't coming to the west, user
I'm so sorry

Made a thread for yall
8ch
.net/leftypol/res/1828996.html

>capitalism is unsustainable, it's about to collapse
>150 years
>we're literally only getting wealthier and wealthier

stop taking this dead jew seriously.

Democracy has always been a sham. The only reason the Founding Fathers supported democracy was because it allowed them to seize power from the (actually very benign) monarchy. They didn't seriously believe that everyone citizen should have a say in how society is run. It was just the most politically convenient thing to support at the time.

The name came from a Zalgo thread in /b/ a number of years ago. I keep rather fit from self propelled transportation. I am a childless lesbian and my decor is nothing like that, thanks.

I'm trying to remember what the academic term for the race-to-the-bottom theory is vis-a-vis interstate competition, but somewhat encapsulates it.
The capitalists can(with varying degrees depending on the fungibility of their assets) use the threat of capital flight to discipline the political environment and the proletariat.

It's a short-term strategy.
Their plan was to import a bunch of minorities who would group together under the "fuck whitey" banner. Blame everything on whites, promise solutions once whites are outnumbered. The social conservatism stuff is all just memewars, actual capitalists don't give a fuck if arabs don't like fag marriage or whatever, they just need slaves who are used to low standards to displace middle-class white strivers who actually believe in the democracy meme.
It's basically the exact inverse of what the right-wingers do.

...

>we're literally only getting wealthier and wealthier
Are you genuinely this dumb? Are you really unaware of the income disparity?

Do you even know about automation? If people can't get work how are they going to keep alive? The toxicity of our environment seems almost a planed tactic to eliminate the excessive amounts of humans.

that's not how you spell 'liberals'. New Labour and the democrats are parties of cosmopolitan finance and the managerial classes. Hillary's campaign focused on two fronts: 1) moderate republicans in wealthy suburbs. 2) minorities supposedly terrified of Trump. It failed in both accounts. political economy is the only base for a popular mass movement. Trump was aided by demagogic appeals to the working class, while Hillary avoided political economy entirely for market orthodoxy and demagogic appeals to identity. The class coalition that upheld 3rd way governments is disintegrating. the average black man in the ghetto doesn't care much about cultural appropriation or the diversity of executive boards.

Revisionist history.
You're ignoring the rather major era of Enlightenment humanism which the Founding Fathers were stepped in and of which democratic idealism was the political aspect.

Or let me guess every Enlightenment philosopher and statesman was just 346 layers of irony deep in their Game of Goons long-con.

They are importing people dependent on the government to outvote conservatives who moreso want to be left alone

You're talking about relative wealth. You're just jealous other people have more money than you even though your standard of living is better than like %95 of the world.

Sort yourself out bucko

>Do you even know about automation? If people can't get work how are they going to keep alive?

We don't know what will happen, stop pretending to know you do.

>The toxicity of our environment seems almost a planed tactic to eliminate the excessive amounts of human

full retard

What I'm trying to, rather ineloquently, say is that the labor in order to overthrow the capitalist class they have to defeat collective action problems within collective action problems like Russian nesting dolls.

I say play electoral politics and take what you can get.

Marxism is the authentic successor and the logical conclusion to enlightenment thought. The founders embraced enlightenment humanism as long as it didn't enter into conflict with their interests. They didn't give up their slaves or redistribute their wealth didn't they? Even the jeffersonian yeoman farmer ideal was sacrificed at the altar of finance. read up on Alexander Hamilton and the suppression of the whiskey rebellion

It's been firmly established that democracy does not preclude wealth inequality. In fact wealth inequality is literally impossible, regardless of political system.

And they didn't give up their slaves, yaaaaawn.
They were classicists. Their idea of democracy was based on ancient greece, not 20th century feminazis.

Literally nothing you wrote amounts to the Founding Fathers supporting democracy merely as a "sham."

>4% of the population produces 25% of its trash
>capitalism isn't unsustainable because we've somehow managed to produce 435643 tons of useless products every day and somehow stupid people keep buying them

>asks why do people romanticize the working class
>proceeds to romanticize the working class

I know I have it better than 95% of the world, I want them to be at least as well off. I'm beyond the jealousy of my youth, I now know the wealthy live mentally impoverished lives and would like to save them from their zombified sociopathic lives.
>We don't know what will happen
People will lose their jobs. No new jobs will replace them. They either make a hefty universal basic income available to all or they grow the masses of revolutionaries. I know a number of things could happen.
>Full retard
I said it seems. I'm not some one-world-government/new-world-order/Illuminati twit.

I'm well sorted, Petersonfag. You're the one with your head in the sand.

>I now know the wealthy live mentally impoverished lives and would like to save them from their zombified sociopathic lives

You're the same as everyone else: romanticizing yourself against the ruling class.

>Universal income

Great idea. Let's take away the very last arena of community (work) and surrender to total personal isolation. Capitalists are fucking cackling at the idea of paying nu-males $800 a month to do nothing in exchange for total domination of the political, economic, and social spheres. Literally checkmate.

I would take UBI if I meant I could do nothing but play vidya all day. I don't even care if I'm "giving up power" to the ruling class, sounds like a sweet deal to me. In fact, I hope this happens

Is this supposed to trigger me or something?
I was already under the assumption that you're pathetic. The existence of guys like you is not news to anyone.

consider yourself
>Atomised

>romanticizing yourself against the ruling class.
Damn straight, sulky.

The way they imagine it now is simply as a supplemental. You'd still need to work. But yeah, if there are no jobs and you don't like the idea of paying someone to be free... Why in the hell are we still playing this sick game?

is it less pathetic than being a self hating marxist sjw numale? oh fuck off. there is no magic 'entitlement dust' that gives you a right to other people's achievements. people like Elon Musk are actually out there bringing progress forward. they don't owe you anything.

>stupid, illiterate, malleable, bigoted
these are all bad things
>and religions
there is literally nothing wrong with being religious

pro tip: every democratic president in history was a Christian, and the only Catholic president was a democrat who is responsible for moving the ball on the Civil Rights movement

And why have centuries of experience to back up that claim

>I want them to be at least as well off.

Bullshit, you don't give a single shit about the rest of the world. You're just so pure of heart you just have to whine about people having more money than you, that it?

>I now know the wealthy live mentally impoverished lives and would like to save them from their zombified sociopathic lives.

Guess what nigger, most wealthy people are smart and hardworking. You're the one who's ranting about other people on an Azerbaijani metalworking forum.

>No new jobs will replace them.

We just don't know. If somebody knew what would happen after automation they'd make billions with that knowledge.

Clean your room first before trying to rearrange civilization.

>
>you don't like the idea of paying someone to be free

???

Embarrassing post.