MZT says that first we must analyze the primary contradiction in a society, from which all other contradictions build from.

My thought is that American working class do not revolt because our lifestyle is subsidized by the global poor. Of course there are impoverished workers (and lumpen) within America, but they are dissuaded by revolutionary organization because of this neocolonial dependence.

And I don't just mean "treats" although that's a big part of it. Many basic essentials are produced through the global supply chain and most people rely on income from companies who plunder the global south.

The financialization and deindustrialization of the American economy from neoliberal politics is the culmination of this. Why when workers made gains against industrial capitalists, production was moved to the global south.

I'm sure this has been discussed before by proper scholars, but I'd love to hear your thoughts. I'm just reading through On Contradiction now.

    • BowlingForDeez [he/him]
      hexagon
      ·
      2 years ago

      Wanting to improve material conditions for people in the imperial core can make things worse for people outside of it

      I think it's more the inverse, that improving conditions in the global south would lead to degradation of the imperial core.

      Workers in the core CAN improve their situation without exacting more from the global poor. We could get concessions from the American bourgeoisie, but somehow a sizeable percent of the population doesn't even want that. We could also build mutual aid and dual power to imrpove conditions in the core.

      It is the ability of finance economy that allows the bourgeoisie to punish workers for trying to make gains, but those gains can be made. Finance has a remarkable track record at dividing workers. The idea of "owning your suburban home is the American dream" was a very effective way to divide the proles. Tying people's housing (as well as their 401ks, retirement, etc) to success of the finance industry turned many people into wanna-be-bourgeoisie.

      You're right of course that brings us to the difference between demsocs and marxists. Demsocs would like to work within the system, while Marxists demand that new, equitable systems be built. But leftist movement is pretty far away from building our own Soviets.

      • usernamesaredifficul [he/him]
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        yeah I think we're already extracting as much as we possibly can from the global south.

        it's a bit stupid but this scene from a movie I loved as a kid always came to mind when it comes to the imperial proletariat wanting more of the share of the stolen loot. They do sort of have a point that it was them who did the violence to get the global souths money but also that's money that is stolen.