Posts Tagged ‘Wage-slavery’

Class Unity and Intersectionality

Posted: 26/01/2018 by zandtao in Media, Struggle
Tags: , ,

As usual I like to read Black Agenda Report analyses, and I am pleased to see that class is an issue now being raised. Intersectionality is a far too haphazard process to base any movement on, sadly at the present time any form of unity or common concurrence including intersectionality is worthwhile.

The Left, and I mean the genuine left as opposed to an umbrella left dominated by liberals, has completely failed the 99% in the twentieth century, and with the flames of liberal indignation being manipulated continues to fail in the twenty-first. Throughout my limited political involvement in the UK, the genuine Left was always fighting the intellectuals both outside and inside its ranks, and in the end were easily pushed out of the way by Blair and his neoliberal promotion of liberalism. I had hoped in Occupy to see a return to the genuine left but instead funded right-wing intellectualism has succeeded in completely dividing the movement. There is now only confusion and the 1% are using the forces of rising fascism to increase their accumulation.

Class is still a relevant issue, but obviously “some Marxist analysis is dated”. Class solidarity united against war and wage slavery is the only unity that can prevail in any way against the 1%. But in my adult 45 years we are the furthest from any such unity. Promoting liberalism has divided the class, and issue-based campaigns completely dominate the agenda; and this agenda is one that is being manipulated by the 1% through their strategy of confusion. How can there possibly be revolutionary understanding presented on mainstream media (owned by 1% moguls)? It is only acceptable because liberals can pretend to be fighting, have their jobs and houses at the same time – and their entertainment.

Class is more than the summation of separate identities, and solidarity within class would soon teach that liberal representation for one group can never be beneficial for a class. If the number of jobs are the same and there is transfer of jobs from one class member to another, we are only promoting the interests of the 1%. New jobs have to be taken from the accumulations of the 1% – not each other.

We need a class identity again. Back in the day in the UK there was a limited class identity of the cloth caps with some middle-class involvement. That class identity gave those people some strength, and there was a feeling of class identification. But there was a failure in education and solidarity so within that class there was racism, sexism, homophobia etc. Although some in the movement tried to educate they failed, and, instead of the class developing, interest groups started to dominate. At the same time there were fewer of the production-line “working” class, the class failed to change with the job market, and intellectual egos claimed an arrogance (above cloth caps) becoming forces for separation. Now instead of having a united class of wage-slaves, we have interest groups and those interests can claim to be both left and right within the same interest group; for many in these groups wage-slavery is not an issue, many such buying into their career delusions. More importantly those interest groups have no means of attack, they do not threaten the profits of the 1%. Whilst withdrawal of labour was a useable weapon, now what weapons do we use – perpetual bleating in the mainstream media? Demonstrations that are ridiculed? Progress can only be made with unity, a unity that recognises a united class, a united 99%. And then progress can be made through class strategies such as class demonstrations, consumer control, and constructive struggle against the 1%. Only strong unity can meaningfully affect their accumulation.

Interest groups need to be proud to be proletarian again, interest groups need to unite in a class struggle whether it is called the 99% or something else. Dividing the class on interests and supporting such interests through liberalism has no future especially as liberals will dodge any fight that affects their mortgage. When the 1% changes the labour market and it appears workers from one interest group are favoured, we have to scream at the 1%. All of us must scream that way, racists, liberals must address the same cause – 1% accumulation. It is class and not interest groups that can unite, can defend, can defeat, interest groups can only be played off.

I have had to work with racists in the “old grass roots movement”, it was distasteful. They did however fight for the class, sadly I suspect the new generation of those people are now alt-right. A tenuous link to the movement is better than none, and maybe education can happen. If there was no trade union movement those people’s interests would gravitate to the alt-right. These people were not compassionate, they were self-interested, and now that self-interest is probably alt-right. However distasteful it is to work with these people it has to happen, they are far less distasteful than what the 1% and their current puppets are doing. Not everyone has to be right-on to work with them, there can be mutually-beneficial interests in the class.

Success through intersectionality can never work, it is too easy to fan the flames of difference. Accepting class with all the weaknesses of class comrades is the only slim distasteful chance that we have.

Class unity not intersectionality.

<– Previous Post “Love & Wage-Slavery” Next Post “US hegemony” –>

Books:- Treatise, Wai Zandtao Scifi, Matriellez Education.

Blogs:- Ginsukapaapdee, Mandtao, Matriellez.


Posted: 03/09/2017 by zandtao in Freedom, ONE planet, Struggle, War
Tags: ,

There seems no end to the misery. From Horizontalidad in the early 90s through the Arab Spring to Occupy (tag) throughout the world and finally OWS, there had been some hope. But the enemy, the 1%, became marked in this movement – and that scared them. So the 1% found the answer, create confusion on the internet by funding all and sundry. Now we have complete chaos, there is no clear genuine left alternative.

In this article Paul Street describes the chaos that would have ensued if Hillary had won. In the article there is a much clearer understanding of on-the-ground US neoliberal politics than anything I could offer from afar. What it definitely shows is the chaos that is now US neoliberal politics. What we now have is the 1%, 2% – a genuine left alternative, and 97% total confusion (I have no basis for the exactness of these figures).

Liberal-bashing is now the fashion amongst the right, and liberal-bleating of a defence is the current level of response. Whilst this is obvious in the US it is occurring throughout the West. The good-old Liberal Obama set the scene for the world’s current greatest humanitarian disaster by sending drones to Yemen. Trump’s alliance with Saudi has seeded the destruction, and the Liberals barely bleat. They cannot do anything about it so they don’t bleat. But if they scream and shout about LBGT toilets, maybe they can do something – and their parties are fine. This is a right-wing created issue to bait the Liberals, meanwhile the real destruction goes on across the world – War for profits in the name of Western neoliberalism.

Is there a solution? Paul talks about a genuine left alternative, but can that ever happen? Since Marx there has been a clear analysis of the source of the problems – the bourgeois 1%, yet we now have a “2%”- acceptance of this. It appears to me that acceptance of this has been on the decrease in my lifetime – not helped at all by the continual left-wing squabbling before the recent “chaos” funding. This leads to the question, can there ever be a united 99%? If we look at the chaos now, the answer seems a resounding no.

Now it is particularly bad but I wonder if the answer could ever have been yes.

To try to get at this we need to look at conditioning. If we move beyond our conditioning we do not accept the 1%-system of neoliberalism, we see that all that matters is compassion. Not, who is in charge? Not, which system do we use? But compassion, compassion for all people. If we are compassionate we don’t fight wars. If we are compassionate we don’t treat people as wage-slaves. We care for people, who they are, and who they could be if enabled. Compassion ends suffering, ends the misery our world is in because of 1%-exploitation (mostly western) and the endless façade of populism, liberal-bashing-and-bleating – neoliberalism. The world needs compassion.

A conditioned person does not put compassion first. When people hear of humanitarian disaster in Yemen, compassion is not the first response; it is conditioning. Muslims, we should protect people but …. If we send money do we look after ourselves? We are good people, our governments cannot be causing wars just for profits, there has to be something wrong with these others. All of these responses are conditioned. The first objective needs to be compassion, put compassion first and leave out the conditioning. When there is a world where compassionate response comes first, then we have a world without division, and division is what is causing the misery. If Rockefeller says we cannot have compassion because my standard of living goes down, we laugh at his greed. Do we laugh at the greed if it is said at the golf club, the country house, etc.? When we look at the poverty that exists in the desert we, right-wing and liberals, are afraid, we, right-wing and liberals, become greedy in case our standard of living is affected, the compassionate and the non-liberal left (different) say “care for them at all costs”.

So why do I differ the compassionate and the non-liberal left? The non-liberal left put their systems, their ideologies first. They are conditioned to believe in systems, that is their education, their intellectualism. As a result of this belief in systems, for years the non-liberal left has fought each other, Commies vs Trots, which version of Marxism is right etc. And whilst they fought, the 1% continued exploitation, and the misery continued – has grown? When there was some crystallisation of action through Horizontalidad and Occupy, there became the funded chaos. Because we were all still responding on a conditioned level – even if that conditioned response is against the system, it was easy to create funded chaos by attacking theories. You cannot attack unconditioned compassion except by greed and selfishness

Can we ever fight our conditioning and become an unconditioned 99% – 100%? Can we ever be a compassionate 99% – a compassionate 100%? I doubt it. Can the 99% unite behind a theory without compassion and without removing conditioning? The evidence so far is no, I think no with the theories -permanently.

But compassion and removal of conditioning is a big ask. But it is a better objective than asking for 99% to believe in a system.

But before erstwhile comrades jump down my neck, where does compassion and removal of conditioning take us? In mid-19th century it would have taken us to a Marxist analysis of the exploitation by the bourgeois, now it takes us to seeing the 1%-system in the world. But compassion does not ask “do we believe in Marxism?”, it asks “how does understanding Marx lead to compassion?” And the actions are little different, but there is not the rhetorical arguing over systems and theories. Don’t be conditioned into believing a different theory, be compassionate.

Remove conditioning, make our first response compassion globally, have Unity through forgetting our theories.

Or have the misery that is continuing.

When we act with compassion there are no wars, there is no slavery.

Books:- Treatise, Wai Zandtao Scifi, Matriellez Education.

Blogs:- Ginsukapaapdee, Matriellez.