It's amazing how many leftists get sucked into defending small businesses or mom-and-pop landlords / land speculators. People who own a business have nothing in common with people who work at the business and people who own land have nothing in common with people who rent land. In most cases small businesses and landowners are even more reactionary than big ones.
Class isn't how much money you make; if a person doesn't make a lot of money but it all comes from exploitation/capital ownership that person is not your friend. Class collaborationism will be the death of us all.
At least with a big corporation there's a non-zero chance you'll be able to just slip into the cracks and draw a steady paycheck for basically nothing.
Oh god, I think I remember your account. Are you really trying to side load the "owning your house that you live in makes you a landlord" argument again? Because that shit is radlib trash and not based in any actual understanding of the class system.
I have never said owning your home makes you a landlord nor do I believe that. This post is simply saying small-scale capital owners are no less reactionary than large-scale capital owners.
One would have to read the above comment in very bad faith to conclude that it means owning your home makes you a landlord.
Homeowners are a reactionary class; they’re small-scale land speculators. Honestly, the millions of homeowners colluding to keep prices high through NIMBYism, eroding of tenant protections, and overspending on police to brutalize the homeless are more responsible for the housing crisis than the large institutional investors.
Anti-Homeowner Aktion.
EDIT: It is insane how many seemingly progressive turn into Republicans the second their precious home wealth is questioned. Like, every one of these “pro-homeowner” talking points is straight out of a suburban county GOP’s policy platform.
Congratulations, you found a comment where I talked about how homeowners will protect the values of their properties, a well-accepted fact to any leftist who has done work in housing justice.
The following two statements can be true at the same time:
People who own land have nothing in common with people who rent land.
Homeowners are not landlords.
Debate bro culture on this website really sucks; this is Reddit shit. Why are you taking time out of your day to bad-faith interpret my first comment, then dig through weeks my posting history to find another comment that doesn't even back up what you're accusing me of saying?
What are you even trying to argue? That class is something other than your relationship to the means of production? Or are you just fishing for arguments for its own sake? I really don't feel like arguing with you.
You were complaining about the exact same thing as last time and then tried to say you weren't.
People who own land have nothing in common with people who rent land.
lol no. Workers who own a house are still workers.
That class is something other than your relationship to the means of production?
Just to confirm, you're saying that not renting from a landlord makes you a capitalist? Basing your understanding of class on whether someone else has more or less assets instead of the way they got those assets is flawed.
Just to confirm, you’re saying that not renting from a landlord makes you a capitalist?
:no: :bugs-no:
I sincerely do not know how many times I have to answer this question. No, not renting from a landlord does not make you a capitalist. Just like owning one unit of stock doesn't make you a capitalist.
Please stop picking apart every little bit of the above comment and interpreting it in bad faith to try to score a sick dunk. It is a bad use of both your time and mine.
i really think that lower/middle/upper class terminology has been one of the greatest weapons for the bourgeoisie in obscuring class relations. at this point if you call a white collar office drone "working class" most of them will be legitimately offended, and so you cut off a huge percentage of the working class from even thinking about class struggle. and the small business owner just slots in nicely alongside the white collar office drone in the "middle class" as if theres no difference between them. ive been making a conscious effort lately to talk about lower/middle/upper income working-class people instead in discussions where wealth is the relevant factor, but im not sure how much it helps. i do think reclaiming class terminology is a hill worth dying on though.
also im sure theres a tonne written about this but ive also been thinking recently about the ideological content of western government support for small business. the "mum and dad" businesses as the hardworking salt of the earth that politicians love to go on about are such good propaganda tools for bourgeois interests and obscuring class relations, and i feel like so many of them would be outcompeted and destroyed or gobbled up by large corporate chains by now without the intervention of state policies. i do wonder to what extent small business has been consciously propped up precisely as an intentional smokescreen to obscure class relations (as opposed to just general pro-market sentiment).
It's amazing how many leftists get sucked into defending small businesses or mom-and-pop landlords / land speculators. People who own a business have nothing in common with people who work at the business and people who own land have nothing in common with people who rent land. In most cases small businesses and landowners are even more reactionary than big ones.
Class isn't how much money you make; if a person doesn't make a lot of money but it all comes from exploitation/capital ownership that person is not your friend. Class collaborationism will be the death of us all.
Case in point in the comments lmao
deleted by creator
At least with a big corporation there's a non-zero chance you'll be able to just slip into the cracks and draw a steady paycheck for basically nothing.
:citations-needed:
Oh god, I think I remember your account. Are you really trying to side load the "owning your house that you live in makes you a landlord" argument again? Because that shit is radlib trash and not based in any actual understanding of the class system.
I have never said owning your home makes you a landlord nor do I believe that. This post is simply saying small-scale capital owners are no less reactionary than large-scale capital owners.
One would have to read the above comment in very bad faith to conclude that it means owning your home makes you a landlord.
Lol ok, I did remember your account right:
/- DetroitLolCat - https://hexbear.net/post/156705/comment/1914971
I saved that thread because of how bad the take was. The comments dunking on it were gold though.
Congratulations, you found a comment where I talked about how homeowners will protect the values of their properties, a well-accepted fact to any leftist who has done work in housing justice.
The following two statements can be true at the same time:
People who own land have nothing in common with people who rent land.
Homeowners are not landlords.
Debate bro culture on this website really sucks; this is Reddit shit. Why are you taking time out of your day to bad-faith interpret my first comment, then dig through weeks my posting history to find another comment that doesn't even back up what you're accusing me of saying?
What are you even trying to argue? That class is something other than your relationship to the means of production? Or are you just fishing for arguments for its own sake? I really don't feel like arguing with you.
You were complaining about the exact same thing as last time and then tried to say you weren't.
lol no. Workers who own a house are still workers.
Just to confirm, you're saying that not renting from a landlord makes you a capitalist? Basing your understanding of class on whether someone else has more or less assets instead of the way they got those assets is flawed.
:no: :bugs-no:
I sincerely do not know how many times I have to answer this question. No, not renting from a landlord does not make you a capitalist. Just like owning one unit of stock doesn't make you a capitalist.
Please stop picking apart every little bit of the above comment and interpreting it in bad faith to try to score a sick dunk. It is a bad use of both your time and mine.
Yeah, that's not what I'm saying.
Maybe communicate better then idk what to tell you.
I'm disengaging, please :blob-stop:
i really think that lower/middle/upper class terminology has been one of the greatest weapons for the bourgeoisie in obscuring class relations. at this point if you call a white collar office drone "working class" most of them will be legitimately offended, and so you cut off a huge percentage of the working class from even thinking about class struggle. and the small business owner just slots in nicely alongside the white collar office drone in the "middle class" as if theres no difference between them. ive been making a conscious effort lately to talk about lower/middle/upper income working-class people instead in discussions where wealth is the relevant factor, but im not sure how much it helps. i do think reclaiming class terminology is a hill worth dying on though.
also im sure theres a tonne written about this but ive also been thinking recently about the ideological content of western government support for small business. the "mum and dad" businesses as the hardworking salt of the earth that politicians love to go on about are such good propaganda tools for bourgeois interests and obscuring class relations, and i feel like so many of them would be outcompeted and destroyed or gobbled up by large corporate chains by now without the intervention of state policies. i do wonder to what extent small business has been consciously propped up precisely as an intentional smokescreen to obscure class relations (as opposed to just general pro-market sentiment).