I mean, yeah. And all of that is by design and reinforced at all times.
There is no real left anyway. If there is one, I as an individual represent a significant portion of it. Probably tells you enough.
There's a decent amount of what I'd call "left curious" (workshop needed). Basically very nationalistic (they wouldn't like this identification but it's true) socdem types who would absolutely sign off right now on nuking any country on earth if they received healthcare in exchange. A lot of Bernie, AOC, etc. generic supporters fall in here I think. "Salvageable" people who recognize some of the solutions domestically, but their knowledge of foreign affairs and how it all ties together is lacking, to say the least. Non existent. By design, by the way. The Overton window allows juuuuust a small room for discussion of things like nationalized healthcare, maybe abolishing private insurance and stuff. But divestment from Israel or ending NATO- absolutely off the table for actual political discussion. And bringing it up a bit too much might result in jack booted thugs stomping your face at some protest.
But anyway, as for the struggle part, communists in China and Russia and elsewhere struggled because they had no option. Capital pushed them to the point of actually having nothing to lose. In the US, material conditions are definitely relatively bad (compared to even Canada and definitely many European nations- although the inequality is crazy. Many people are "ok" but the ones who aren't, the working poor and homeless, are very very not ok.) but also good overall. So while it gives an impression at all times, to those of us who pay attention, that "what the fuck? This shit sucks. We should organize and fix this" in reality most people have enough food, have entertainment, lots of it, and while things are absolutely getting worse, it just isn't bad enough yet.
From a purely human or even animalistic standpoint, if someone knows they can get by right now, but it feels bad, or they can risk their life (literally) in a grand struggle to win it all... hard to convince people to gamble. Yes, if you're ideologically there then you're there. But most people aren't, they don't care, and they won't care until things are incredibly far worse than they are now.
This is why I think the American left is not serious.
No the real reason is most first world workers are not exploited by capitalism and benefit from unequal exchange with the global south and therefore have no material incentive to support socialism.
They're not actually. If you read Zak Copes Divided World Divided Class he lays out that no one is legally exploited in the imperial core. All exploitation that happens here illegal/semi-legal.
Legal/semi-legal? What kind of distinction is that and why should it matter? Exploitation is exploitation, laws are just made up bullshit, especially when written by the bourgeoisie
You're missing the point, labor laws as they are in most of the US, if you're working legal hours for legal wages you're not being exploited, you're actually being paid above the value of your labor, capitalists can afford to do this because exploitation in the global south is so great capitalists can afford to throw first world workers a bone. Plus it gives them a class of well off consumers to sell all the cheap shit the workers of the global south produce.
Most of the stories you hear about explorations in the first world actually violate labor laws, or at least come close to it.
It still seems like a very non-materialist distinction.
If you're working legal hours for legal wages
Why do you need to make this caveat? If people are being put in a position where they have to accept extralegal conditions of employment in order to survive, they're being exploited. Hand waving that away because it's not "legal" seems naive at best and intentionally misleading at worst.
I think the point is that if you're working legal hours for legal wages in the empire, you're being paid more than the value of your labor because of superexploitation of the global south. The Marxist definition of exploitation is not keeping the whole value of your labor; given this framing, an imperial subject working legal hours for legal wages is keeping more than the value of their labor, and so cannot be exploited in the Marxist sense.
deleted by creator
not only is it not serious, it's less than 1% of the population
I mean, yeah. And all of that is by design and reinforced at all times.
There is no real left anyway. If there is one, I as an individual represent a significant portion of it. Probably tells you enough.
There's a decent amount of what I'd call "left curious" (workshop needed). Basically very nationalistic (they wouldn't like this identification but it's true) socdem types who would absolutely sign off right now on nuking any country on earth if they received healthcare in exchange. A lot of Bernie, AOC, etc. generic supporters fall in here I think. "Salvageable" people who recognize some of the solutions domestically, but their knowledge of foreign affairs and how it all ties together is lacking, to say the least. Non existent. By design, by the way. The Overton window allows juuuuust a small room for discussion of things like nationalized healthcare, maybe abolishing private insurance and stuff. But divestment from Israel or ending NATO- absolutely off the table for actual political discussion. And bringing it up a bit too much might result in jack booted thugs stomping your face at some protest.
But anyway, as for the struggle part, communists in China and Russia and elsewhere struggled because they had no option. Capital pushed them to the point of actually having nothing to lose. In the US, material conditions are definitely relatively bad (compared to even Canada and definitely many European nations- although the inequality is crazy. Many people are "ok" but the ones who aren't, the working poor and homeless, are very very not ok.) but also good overall. So while it gives an impression at all times, to those of us who pay attention, that "what the fuck? This shit sucks. We should organize and fix this" in reality most people have enough food, have entertainment, lots of it, and while things are absolutely getting worse, it just isn't bad enough yet.
From a purely human or even animalistic standpoint, if someone knows they can get by right now, but it feels bad, or they can risk their life (literally) in a grand struggle to win it all... hard to convince people to gamble. Yes, if you're ideologically there then you're there. But most people aren't, they don't care, and they won't care until things are incredibly far worse than they are now.
No the real reason is most first world workers are not exploited by capitalism and benefit from unequal exchange with the global south and therefore have no material incentive to support socialism.
they are still exploited
They're not actually. If you read Zak Copes Divided World Divided Class he lays out that no one is legally exploited in the imperial core. All exploitation that happens here illegal/semi-legal.
Legal/semi-legal? What kind of distinction is that and why should it matter? Exploitation is exploitation, laws are just made up bullshit, especially when written by the bourgeoisie
You're missing the point, labor laws as they are in most of the US, if you're working legal hours for legal wages you're not being exploited, you're actually being paid above the value of your labor, capitalists can afford to do this because exploitation in the global south is so great capitalists can afford to throw first world workers a bone. Plus it gives them a class of well off consumers to sell all the cheap shit the workers of the global south produce.
Most of the stories you hear about explorations in the first world actually violate labor laws, or at least come close to it.
It still seems like a very non-materialist distinction.
Why do you need to make this caveat? If people are being put in a position where they have to accept extralegal conditions of employment in order to survive, they're being exploited. Hand waving that away because it's not "legal" seems naive at best and intentionally misleading at worst.
I think the point is that if you're working legal hours for legal wages in the empire, you're being paid more than the value of your labor because of superexploitation of the global south. The Marxist definition of exploitation is not keeping the whole value of your labor; given this framing, an imperial subject working legal hours for legal wages is keeping more than the value of their labor, and so cannot be exploited in the Marxist sense.
Yes, you worded this much better than me.
Read the Zak Cope book he lays it out well. Westerns are being overcompensated for their labor.
that's pretty fucking relative
lmao
Read the Zak Cope book he lays it out very well.