• aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]
    ·
    edit-2
    3 years ago

    I mean this person goes on to say 80% of workers produce no surplus value so I don't know what they're thinking really.

    This is what happens when you try to be third worldist but haven't actually read Mao

    • Nakoichi [he/him]
      hexagon
      ·
      3 years ago

      Honestly I had to post this here because this was such a wild take I had to make sure I wasn't the crazy one here.

      • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]
        ·
        edit-2
        3 years ago

        Yeah it's wild. Also you can be a beneficiary of imperialism and still produce surplus value and be treated like shit by your employer. In the same way a white person can be broke as hell but still experience white privilege at times. It's not a zero sum game. Stuff intersects with each other all the time

    • RNAi [he/him]
      ·
      3 years ago

      Maybe they skimmed the book "Bullshit Jobs"

      • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]
        ·
        3 years ago

        Their whole argument is apparently that Marx said service workers produce no surplus value.

        Just a :galaxy-brain: take

        • NaturalsNotInIt [any]
          ·
          3 years ago

          "Service worker" is almost meaningless for class analysis because an investment banker and a cashier at McDonald's are both "service workers".

          • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]
            ·
            3 years ago

            It's a massive misunderstanding of Marx's theory of unproductive vs productive labour as far as I can tell. I'm at work and don't really have time to debunk the fed brainworms at the moment