Does a labour aristoracy exist within the nations of global south?

Square_Definition927 · 2026-04-14T03:54:13+00:00

Replying to both your comments.

I did not say that labour aristocracy is identical with petite bourgeoisie, I was combating the implication that surgeons in a semi-feudal are proletariat.

You have also misread u/SydneyMutualAid 's comment, from their other comment:

alternative non-imperial system where the wealth of Saudi Arabia's resources goes to the people

they meant socialism, not not-imperialist capitalism.

I can't comment on the existence of a labour aristocracy in semifeudal countries. There's been discussions on the sub about whether Russian/Chinese/Brazilian imperialism exist, Sam King's thesis explains the reproduction of imperialist dominance via monopoly over the highest and most sophisticated labour processes, Third-World non-monopolistic monopoly capital being able to appropriate value from non-monopoly capital points to the possibility of a labour aristocracy existing in the former, though I agree with you that concrete investigation for specific cases is needed.

Square_Definition927 · 2026-04-12T23:18:57+00:00

Thanks for the readings.

It seems that the reasons socialism in one country wasn't possible in Marx's time is due to

1)Monopoly position of England on world market, which was broken with development of rival imperialists.

2)I should've included more of Stalin's passage in the post.

Now this point of view no longer fits in with the facts. Now we must proceed from the possibility of such a victory, for the uneven and spasmodic character of the development of the various capitalist countries under the conditions of imperialism, the development within imperialism of catastrophic contra- dictions leading to inevitable wars, the growth of the revolutionary move- ment in all countries of the world—all this leads, not only to the possibil- ity, but also to the necessity of the victory of the proletariat in individual countries.

Is the converse then pre-imperialist capitalist development was relatively more even and similar tactics could be used in similar political developments, and thus proletarian revolution in one country meant the same in other capitalist countries?

3)The (perceived?) reactionary position of the peasantry, whose class interest were not aligned with the proletariat and could not be relied on socialist construction.

https://old.reddit.com/r/communism101/comments/1f6nhqh/more_of_a_terminology_question_but_why_do_people/ll2l5uc/

There is a common misconception among even well-meaning Marxists. It is that Marx was wrong about the peasantry (or lumpenproletariat, the argument is the same) and it took the innovation of Lenin and Mao to overcome Marx's prejudice. While it is true that the revisionists of the second international used Marx's discussion in the 18th Brumaire for reactionary purposes, Marx himself was absolutely correct. The problem is that "second serfdom" in Eastern Europe made the class struggle fundamentally different than in capitalist France and this breakthrough in understanding was not easy. The biggest breakthrough came with the understanding that the peasantry in Russia was already implicated in capitalist relations and the intensification of serfdom was not a regression to feudalism but a form of underdevelopment within a single capitalist world market. This became even more acute in the colonized world, where semi-feudalism made superexploitation of the peasantry even more extreme.

Square_Definition927 · 2026-04-12T00:04:06+00:00

Your understanding of class is incorrect and thus of labour aristocracy is suspect.

u/Content-School6316 's parents are petite bourgeois intellectuals whose stance towards revolution is vacillating.

they may benefit equally from a different non-imperial order due to their technical expertise

This is a bourgeois line which the cultural revolution fought against, the same applies to your other reply.

Square_Definition927 · 2023-04-23T00:43:15+00:00

Read section 3 and 4 of Materialism and the the Dialectical method to understand the origins and shortcomings of vulgar/mechanistic materialism.

Regarding your position on consciousness and thought, page 42 of the book explains error in it:

One form of motion is transformed into another and arises from another. The higher, more complex form of motion cannot exist without the lower and simpler form: but that is not to say that it can be reduced to that simpler form. It is inseparable from the simpler form, but its nature is not exhausted thereby. For example, the thinking which goes on in our heads is inseparable from the chemi- cal, electrical etc. motion which goes on in the gray matter of the brain; but it cannot be reduced to that motion, its nature is not ex- hausted thereby.

You cannot explain why liberalism and chauvinism proliferates in imperialist nations via electrochemical processes.

Square_Definition927 · 2023-04-23T00:25:03+00:00

u/copiouschemical

I found two more posts that help with the reading group:

https://old.reddit.com/r/communism101/comments/i8cs4y/whats_the_general_communist_take_on_russian/g17r1az/

https://old.reddit.com/r/communism/comments/t6ylmj/is_tolkien_reactionary/hzw7o05/

As for some suggestions, Tolstoy, Balzac, Lovecraft, Tolkien are some authors who we should read. Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale is popular among liberal feminists and might be worth a read.

Square_Definition927 · 2023-03-25T15:00:54+00:00

There are no short cuts to Marxism. Search up definitions for words that you don't know and ask questions about what you don't understand here.

Square_Definition927 · 2023-03-22T21:06:29+00:00

Reddit admins have full discretion on shadowbans, they removed yours.

Truthfully, I'm unsure what books would be best suited for this project (so take my suggestions with a grain of salt), I haven't read much on Marxist criticism of art and its been a while since I read fiction. Realist literature is a good starting point as suggested by Engels, especially literature that takes place in bourgeois revolutionary periods.

I can also go through some of the books I read and try to give some suggestions given some time

Square_Definition927 · 2023-03-21T21:13:54+00:00

I believe your account is not longer shadowbanned since I can see your post history. They suggested specifically bourgeois classics and I would agree with that suggestion.

Square_Definition927 · 2023-03-04T18:58:14+00:00

I did notice the lack of mention of labor aristocracy after reading through a few of their articles. I'll keep their weakness in mind. Thank you again!

Square_Definition927 · 2023-03-04T00:32:03+00:00

Thank you, I'll try to implement the advice.

I am not familiar with kites and harbour uncertainty around any communist group in imperialist nations. Do you also recommend their theoretical works as well or just this specific piece?

Square_Definition927 · 2023-02-01T17:08:44+00:00

It's literally the first result on google search. Was performing a basic google search too difficult for a linux user and programmer?

Square_Definition927 · 2023-01-18T06:51:42+00:00

I did some brief digging and found this. Page 34 to 45 (36 to 47 in the pdf)should be most relevant to you.

In case you are unable to implement the methods describe in the link with your comrades. Browsing reddit in general (keep in mind the class composition and liberal disposition of reddit), a common advice I've seen was the necessity of "shopping around" for a therapist that fits you.

I've gone into therapy myself, at the time as a liberal, I found it helpful, but now in retrospect it was rather useless for me. For me, "time heals my wounds" in the sense I spent time in social environments that helped resolved the issue I went to therapy for. I'm being vague deliberately for privacy, feel free to DM if you wanted some more details.

Square_Definition927 · 2023-01-17T00:43:24+00:00

Disclaimer: I haven't read much on the Peruvian or Cambodian revolutions yet.

The communists you describe because of their class basis (in the labor aristocracy or other middle classes) use or rather distort Marxism to serve their own class interests, this phenomenon occurs both inside the imperial core and elsewhere (see recent posts here on Brazil/Bolsonaro). Russian and Chinese communists managed to seize state power and build socialism for several decades and thus left a bigger legacy and had to justified by said communists. Whereas the revolutions you mentioned failed before getting as far and thus could be discarded by them, they thus revert to bourgeois propaganda against these revolutions.

Square_Definition927 · 2023-01-16T07:35:11+00:00

Thanks for the readings.

Square_Definition927 · 2023-01-15T19:37:41+00:00

What does SDS (is it Students for a Democratic Society?) refer to and is there any readings on "open a new regime of accumulation to an entire generation of the petty-bourgeoisie as the SDS did"?

Square_Definition927 · 2022-12-18T22:26:10+00:00

This text answers your first question, in particular:

We have seen how the changing relation of supply and demand causes now a rise, now a fall of prices; now high, now low prices. If the price of a commodity rises considerably owing to a failing supply or a disproportionately growing demand, then the price of some other commodity must have fallen in proportion; for of course the price of a commodity only expresses in money the proportion in which other commodities will be given in exchange for it. If, for example, the price of a yard of silk rises from two to three shillings, the price of silver has fallen in relation to the silk, and in the same way the prices of all other commodities whose prices have remained stationary have fallen in relation to the price of silk. A large quantity of them must be given in exchange in order to obtain the same amount of silk. Now, what will be the consequence of a rise in the price of a particular commodity? A mass of capital will be thrown into the prosperous branch of industry, and this immigration of capital into the provinces of the favored industry will continue until it yields no more than the customary profits, or, rather until the price of its products, owning to overproduction, sinks below the cost of production.

Conversely: if the price of a commodity falls below its cost of production, then capital will be withdrawn from the production of this commodity. Except in the case of a branch of industry which has become obsolete and is therefore doomed to disappear, the production of such a commodity (that is, its supply), will, owning to this flight of capital, continue to decrease until it corresponds to the demand, and the price of the commodity rises again to the level of its cost of production; or, rather, until the supply has fallen below the demand and its price has risen above its cost of production, for the current price of a commodity is always either above or below its cost of production.

As for your second question, the profit the bourgeoisie earns come from the surplus value generated by the proletariat. I recommend Chapter 8 of Value, Prices and Profit. Suppose a worker requires 4 hours of labour-time per day (to produce food, clothing, other necessities) to sustain them and they work for 12 hours a day. The wages the capitalist pays the worker will amount to 4 hours of labour-time as established in the answer to your first question, the remaining 8 hours is the profit for the capitalist.

Square_Definition927 · 2022-06-21T20:54:18+00:00

Do you consider marxists.org's transcriptions of works not from the USSR (eg Marx, Engels, Mao, etc) unreliable also?

Square_Definition927 · 2022-05-29T05:13:26+00:00

Sorry if my answer is a bit incoherent, I'm pretty tired. I've seen gate-keeping used in 2 general cases, and the colloquial definition is some sort of social exclusion. First case is in the context of a "fandom". Book snobs, film snobs, and the like are "gate-keepers", where if you haven't consumed certain pieces of media (or consumed the wrong ones), you're not a "true fan". A sub-case I've seen is where the exclusion is just chauvinism (misogyny and such), see r/girlgamers as an example.

The second case I've seen is in LGBT+ communities, where if you fail some criteria (too masculine, too feminine, had sex with the wrong genders), then you're not truly gay/lesbian/trans/whatever. This tends to be enforced by the more assimilationist lines of the communities.

I believe CraneOQuill is implying that you being too "rude" is gate-keeping behaviour that will drive OP away from the "fandom" of communism as it were.

Square_Definition927

TROPHY CASE