There's a problem with Marx's logic regarding the western world. Nobody is forcing anyone to work whatever job "isn't paying them enough".
.
Marxism is just a clever way of whining for lazy people.
It’s funny because since the pandemic, people are refusing to work those crappy jobs with inadequate pay (that no one is forcing them to work). And we call them lazy too.
Also it's less funny that in times of recession the food is still being produced and the houses are still there but people starve because they can't afford it.
saying nobody is forcing anyone to work a job that isn't paying them enough is like saying no one is forcing you to breath, the system as a whole is forcing it, the way things currently are are forcing it. For "the poor" they have effectively 2 choices
1. starve
2. work a job that pays them so little they still skip meals to make rent.
Not only that, in the modern day an entry level job pays proportionately less buying power than it did even 20 years ago. We raised the minimum wage in 2009 and inflation to date has made that 7 dollars an hour worth LESS than the 5.85 minimum wage was in 2007.
Not only that that, modern poor have to deal with an issue that past generations of poor people didn't, retirement age people competing for entry level jobs because they feel bored/unfulfilled but don't need the money. While this sorta thing did happen in the past, it wasn't wide spread for a mix of reasons. Usually this kind of competition was between middle class joe and man who won't retire.
I tend to agree much with Bethorien in that saying people aren’t forced to work or participate in the system is like saying no one is forcing you to follow the law. I mean- that’s partially true- you can break any law you care to- but an organized system will force consequences on you for foist against it or not participating. “Sovereign citizens” tend to quickly learn that the “opt out” clause of society isn’t simply deciding you don’t want to participate and being free of the ruling power. With basically every scrap of land on earth Save perhaps Antarctica and a few other exceptions claimed under the laws and systems of some government- without traveling thousands of miles to “unclaimed land” you need to participate in the system just to exist legally. If you try to disappear into the wilderness that is some form of trespassing, squatting etc. if you simply live on the street etc. that is vagrancy- which itself is general a crime.
And even IF you travel to Antarctic or somewhere to be “free of the system” AND somehow manage to survive- most places like that are still covered by international agreements and aren’t free of law or enforcement. So while you can possibly go to lengths so that no one cares enough to bother prosecuting you- you really still can’t be completely free of things- and that’s assuming you don’t catch the attention of some power that decides you are on land of interest to them. my gut and history says if a world power wanted the minerals or land under some shanty town of “free peoples” it will simply take it, and you aren’t likely to get much help if any. Ukraine is an established country with Allies and strategic importance and a civilian population greater than a shanty town or squatter cottage- so the odds of serious relief for a new Antarctic settlement “free from world powers” are slim in that scenario.
So I mean- you can’t really exist “outside the system” completely and sustainably if the system decides otherwise. And of course like many things it is designed so you must “play to win.” It might be hard to find love and raise a family if you completely disconnect from society- and some people might follow you off the grid if you met them before your exit- but again- those are exceptions not rules.
Of course it does bear mentioning that the exploitation of classes isn’t “capitalism,” the Marxist revolution itself turned into an exploitive class based “communism.” We can argue it wasn’t “true pure communism” but we don’t have a “true pure capitalism” either. Almost every enduring philosophy of government in history has exploited “lower classes” in reality. People in power set up rules to serve them and their power. Most people complain but most people do the same thing when they have power, or find they don’t have power for long.
@princessmonstertru I think a lot of people believe that being "forced" to have a job to pay for essentials like food and housing etc. is no different to being forced to give up a portion of your wealth with the power of the state (I.e. fines, cages, guns)
.
Marxism is just a clever way of whining for lazy people.
1. starve
2. work a job that pays them so little they still skip meals to make rent.
Not only that, in the modern day an entry level job pays proportionately less buying power than it did even 20 years ago. We raised the minimum wage in 2009 and inflation to date has made that 7 dollars an hour worth LESS than the 5.85 minimum wage was in 2007.
Not only that that, modern poor have to deal with an issue that past generations of poor people didn't, retirement age people competing for entry level jobs because they feel bored/unfulfilled but don't need the money. While this sorta thing did happen in the past, it wasn't wide spread for a mix of reasons. Usually this kind of competition was between middle class joe and man who won't retire.
Of course it does bear mentioning that the exploitation of classes isn’t “capitalism,” the Marxist revolution itself turned into an exploitive class based “communism.” We can argue it wasn’t “true pure communism” but we don’t have a “true pure capitalism” either. Almost every enduring philosophy of government in history has exploited “lower classes” in reality. People in power set up rules to serve them and their power. Most people complain but most people do the same thing when they have power, or find they don’t have power for long.