I would argue that the relationship between classes (specifically here capitalists and workers) is more mechanical in nature. Any owner who profits without working is automatically extracting wealth from a worker. It’s a parasitic relationship.
-
-
Replying to @ILoveUTigerLily
Okay but that's the whole thing, it's all socially constructed, including all the "mechanical" shit that underlies class, like the concept of property As we all know, money is just pieces of paper and bits in a computer, and so are titles and leases and laws
2 replies 3 retweets 41 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect
You still haven’t addressed the parasitic nature of class that doesn’t exist for any of these “identity-based” oppressions. There’s no race that requires another race to exist.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ILoveUTigerLily @arthur_affect
The "white" race absolutely requires non-white races to exist that it can position itself as superior to. This is an inherent part of what "white" as a race is and why different groups have tried so hard to get integrated into the "white" race.
1 reply 0 retweets 42 likes -
Replying to @Eristae @arthur_affect
Can you name the race that, if it stopped existing, the white race would stop existing?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ILoveUTigerLily @arthur_affect
The "white" race positions itself in opposition (and as superior) to *all other* "races" that come and go. The "white" race hasn't always existed, nor has it always existed in the form it has now. But it needs an "other" to position itself as better than. That's what it *means.*
2 replies 0 retweets 36 likes -
Replying to @Eristae @arthur_affect
I’m not sure if you’re trying to say “European ethnic identification doesn’t exist” or “European ethnic identification has historical baggage.” but people who come from Europe are going to have some ethnic identification regardless of their relative power or lack thereof.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
You can easily imagine some alternate universe where some other race has oppressed what we call white people, but there isn’t even an imaginary universe where labor oppresses capital. That’s what I mean by a mechanical nature, and that’s why I don’t call class identity-based.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ILoveUTigerLily @Eristae
In such an imaginary topsy-turvy timeline, whatever word those people used for the hypothetical dark-skinned people who founded a colonial racial hegemony would mean the same thing we mean when we say "white" and "whiteness"
2 replies 2 retweets 14 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @Eristae
The existence of socially constructed ethnicities doesn’t actually require such a relationship, both historically and theoretically, but class *does* and that’s my point.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Well, the existence of something *called* "class" doesn't in theory require stuff like owning the material means of production either I mean this literally, the English idea of "class" includes the concept of a member of the "noble class" who owns no land and collects no rent
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @Eristae
That’s why I’ve tried to be very clear about what I’m talking about. In fact, I’d prefer not to use the term “classism” to describe this relationship as it has different historical connotations.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
If by “classism” you simply me “rich and poor people don’t like each other” then yeah I absolutely agree such a relationship isn’t any more meaningful than race based discrimination, in fact it’s almost certainly less meaningful.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.