Comment on Please consider supporting Lemmy development
barsoap@lemm.ee 1 day agobut retaining the same labor relations to the Means of Production.
So you’re saying that there’s no difference in things like capital access. “Same relations” implying “no difference, nada, zilch”. I don’t find that assessment compatible with the material conditions we live under.
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 day ago
One proletarian has the strength of two average proletarians. Does he constitute his own distinct class, as he can leverage that for somewhat higher pay, and therefore eventually become petty bourgeois? No. Again, we can see specialized labor as a substratum, but to confuse it for a class in and of itself goes against the Marxist conception of class.
Now, if you define class as relations of hierarchy, there’s no dissonance, and we can consider managers their own class. But at that point, we have to be careful not to trip over each other’s understanding of class when discussing Marxism vs Anarchism.
barsoap@lemm.ee 1 day ago
That’s a relationship to a crate or to barbells, not to capital or the means of production.
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 day ago
I already explained how this can cascade into a different relationship at a rate more advantageous than the average proletarian, as you already saw fit to distinguish classes.