When Marx was alive; the proletariat was starving, had almost nothing but the essentials to survive albeit barely...

When Marx was alive; the proletariat was starving, had almost nothing but the essentials to survive albeit barely, and had to work to the bone for ends meet.

Today, the middle class and even the lower class in the west is able to afford a computer, a car, plenty of food, perhaps even a pet. And it wasn't because of Marxism. It was because the average worker starting in the post WWII era in the west made huge gains in average collective wealth as manufacturing and global communication improved.

Marxism is an outdated ideology. The average middle class and even lower class in America has a significantly higher standard of living now than any other time in history. Complaining that the bourgeoisie is richer now is just pure envy. It was a valid argument back in those days because of how separated the social classes were. Its not a valid argument anymore. At least not in America. You can say its principles but principles don't hold much weight unless you can back them up somehow through application. And we all know how that turned out

didn't read lol

Elaborate. Does a middle class not exist to you?

Revolutions don't happen because things are really bad, revolutions happen when people's expectations aren't met.

Sure.
But do we have power? Do we control our own destinies, the political climates of the places we live, can we shape the world according to our own ethical values?

The frustration with the lack of real democracy everywhere would indicate otherwise.
Sure, trinkets are nice, but toys are for children.
I want power.

The middle class in not a class, it's a socio-economic strata and has nothing to do with a class function in the classical sense.

Thats wrong. Thats why you don't see revolutions anymore in the western world despite these so-called "expectations" rarely being met. The pill you have to swallow is that the average American is actually fairly content with their way of life.

"The middle class" is not a class, it's an income bracket. There are two classes, the working class also known as the proletariat, and the ruling class, known as the bourgeoisie. The divide is on who owns the means of production, and who is exploited for their labor power.

Go read a fucking book before trying to have this discussion.

>invalidates the argument against a vast and growing disparity between the upper and lower class

Nope.

Trump just won.
The average american is not content at all.

Classic communist anti-science

I never said that that wasn't true, just that revolutions don't happen when people are starving or whatever. You could have the highest HDI in the world and still have a revolution if people weren't willing to settle for it.

I didn't say there is no such thing as a sociao-economic strata that's called "the middle class", just that it's not a class in the sense that economists used that term before the 1950's.

The average America either A.) voted for Trump themselves; B.) are apathetic towards Trump. Or C.) Are angry at Trump but are busy at home being keyboard warriors about it.

The protesters are a huge minority

these type of shit is why maoists exist

think about it OP, your retardation created its own marxist ideology

thats how stupid your kind is

America was never a true democracy because you can't trust the lowest common denominator to be able to properly self-govern and because it becomes a popularity contest. If the electoral college didn't exist all of a presidents campaign efforts would be towards appealing to California voters while ignoring everyone else. It actually gives the little guys even more power because it ensures each state has equal representation in a given election.

Yeah, but he won, and he clearly represents populist frustration with lack of influence on the political process.
Look at polling on Congress or the general direction that america has taken. People are disillusioned.
You live a nice sheltered life if you don't sense that.

Look at what Trump ran on. If the average american was content, then promising to MAGA wouldn't have been effective.

Average labor power (replaceable by any Joe shmo, you'd say "unskilled") still and always will get paid subsistence wages.
Pockets of above average labor power creates the illusion of a system that creates wealth for all

That's a non-sequiteur. Whether or not people are able to self-govern is irrelevant to whether or not they're frustrated with being hindered from doing so, which they clearly are. Whether or not you think people are able to self-govern or not (which history clearly indicates that they are) they certainly crave self-governance and power, which is the whole point of socialism.

Haha wew are you listening to yourself right now

To elaborate on this point:
You're arguing as if a higher standard of living on average closes the gap, however this would show a complete lack of how averages work anyway.
Average between 25 and 26 is 25.5
Average between 1 and 50 is 25.5
So, as you can see, the average only mystifies your argument, and actually says nothing about where the lower class is actually, today.

People became dissatisfied with the democratic party being so disconnected from the average voter. The democrats being so disconnected and the media being so biased did more for Trump than Trump did for himself. I don't think it really reflects how the average America felt about their way of life; I think it reflects how Americans felt about the direction they were headed.

bourgeois apologist pls go

And thus their lack of influence of the direction they were headed, thus the system that made them unable to have a say in this and thus their way of life.

Either way, this is moving the goal-post because you're already conceeding that people were disatisfied, which you held that they weren't just moments ago.

My original argument was that I don't think the average American was dissatisfied with their way of life and I stand by that claim

Middle Class = Working Class+Human Capital.
Agree or Disagree?

Well obviously they are since their way of life enabled them to lose influence on the political process and thus cause them to become frustrated.

Unless you do not believe that a way of life that enables certain individuals to become immensely rich and buy off politicians has nothing to do with people being fed up with the politicians being bought off.

The proletariat are still starving, you Americentric dolt. The U.S. has simply outsourced a fair amount of its exploited, starving workers to other, poorer countries. The benefits of globalism!

Welcome to Holla Forums, newfag. Here you will learn that the West is not the only part of the planet, that comfortably wealthy American families are not the only workers, and that you are probably an idiot.


Yes, the average American who voted for Trump is extremely dissatisfied with globalism and their living situation. You cannot say that Americans are happy when they just voted for the "burn it all down" candidate.

*has anything to do with

Are you implying we would bring poverty to America along with new manufacturing jobs should we bring those back?

You're missing my point.

It was never about overall level of satisfaction or the amount of stupid luxuries you have in your life. It was about fairness and fairly sharing the product of the work. We are less equal now than ever before as the wealth divide is growing. CEOs are overpaying themselves at average worker's expense. Devaluing his work so that they can keep more out of warrantless greed. So maybe Marx was right.

But what drove Marx to begin with was unsatisfactory living conditions of the lower classes. This isn't a real factor anymore. Thus there is no driving force for Marxism in the west anymore. You can't just push for equality for the sake of equality, thats just not a good enough reason. Nobody cares if you want a new Lamborghini. In the west its just a matter of moving up luxuries now. Marx probably wouldn't give a fuck if he was alive today because nowadays the lower classes are materialistic

You're wrong. Trump didn't run on "Stop America From Not Being Great", he ran on MAGA. This implies that they picked up on something currently being wrong and voted for the guy who said he'd fix it, as opposed to Hillary who pretty much ran on continuing the status quo.

What about the rich people who are able to undermine the democracy and thus frustrate people with the direction the country takes.
This is clearly an issue, even in the West.

I don't know whether you live under a rock or are just retarded. Maybe both.

Is this satire?

thats because you are a cuck

...

Obviously the rich don't have the power you think they have because they tried playing the popular votes game this election and failed miserably.

Small businesses are thriving in America though

fuck off, faggot

Ummm…
Yeah. That's my entire point. People voted for Trump because he was the candidate that the rich people, who are in power, didn't prefer.

Irony is of course that he himself is a rich person and took plenty of money from people who was even richer than himself.

That doesn't matter much considering that intentions are what matter, and clearly people are frustrated with rich people buying off their politicians and undermining their democratic will.

The bourgeoisie infight among one another, but can and will come together when their property rights are threatened.

Small business are petit-bourgeoise.

Why do I get the feeling that term was made up solely to feed somebodies confirmation bias?

Yes, that would absolutely happen. Manufacturing jobs left America because unions and proper working conditions made them unprofitable (comparatively). If they came back, it would be in the absence of worker protections, and America would be awful again.

A revolution just happened in the US 3 days ago.