I keep hearing from people in my life that spirituality is an essential part of living a meaningful existence. I hear the phrase "let go and let God" and "everything happens for a reason" used a lot as advice and comfort. However, I'm an atheist and a materialist. I don't know how I could even be spiritual with those beliefs. At the same time, my life is not fulfilling despite the fact that I am not struggling financially. Moreover, I feel paralyzed when I try to get off my privileged ass and do even the bare minimum for socialist organizing because I realize that it goes directly against my labor aristocratic class interests. I feel like knowing that sticking my neck out and contributing to the real movement to change the present state of things is the morally correct thing to do isn't enough to drive me.
In short, what is spirituality? Is it compatible with materialism? If so, how? And if spirituality is the wrong tree to bark up, how can I drive myself to do what is to be done?
There are lots of benefits to being in a society where you know you're equal with everybody but let's not pretend that there aren't benefits to being in a class that does the exploiting. I kinda feel the same way when people are like "white supremacy harms white people" like that's true but historically white supremacy got white people a whole lot of free land and resources without having to feel guilty about it.
No I meant you specifically.
I'm a labor aristocrat and I have shit wages, shit healthcare, I own nothing, am fed garbage, live in a car hell, people worse off than me are forced to make my environment unsafe, I have microplastics in me, I'm exploited and abused daily by my boss, I don't feel like I'm getting shit. So what're you getting?
Which of my garbage spoils are getting worse under socialism?
Consider a labor aristocrat software engineer making $100-200k/year. They own a home (with a mortgage), have good health insurance, and can put away money for retirement each month. They can afford to shop at good natural food stores or farmers markets or get boxes of farm produce delivered to cook their meals. They eat out at good restaurants 2-3 times/week. They live in a nice part of town which is the only area that has been gentrified with walkable/bikeable infrastructure. They probably put in four hours of real work a day and can work from home some or most days of the week. While they are occasionally disrespected at work by their boss to keep them from getting too uppity, they generally feel valued and their work is interesting. Will this person be materially better off under socialism?
yes, but not immediately
I would say not within their lifetime, if the socialism is internationalist.
some privileges based on the horrible working conditions of others will certainly be lost, but I think other aspects would make up for whatever relatively minor conveniences disappear, even for most labour aristocrats
@ikilledtheradiostar@hexbear.net sorry for not replying to your comment directly, but @hypercracker@hexbear.net hit the nail on the head with this one. I am a WFH computer toucher who makes 6 figures, has good insurance, has easy access to nutritious food, and barely ever do any real work. I'm labor aristocratic in both the sense that I'm an imperial core citizen who is supported by the blood of those in the periphery and in the sense that I am overcompensated for societally useless work that is easy and interesting. I am in a position where it takes a lot of concious effort not to be a treat defender.
Socialism would probably be beneificial for me in the long run (assuming I survive long enough to even reach that point), but any earnest attempt to build socialism will see my standard of living drastically decrease in the short to medium term.
This is going to happen under capitalism. So looks like you're fucked either way
Lol yes.
They'll still have a home with no mortgage,
Theyll have healthcare that wont bankrupt them
they'll eat food either prepared by them or at a community kitchen. Food made by people not exploited would taste exquisite.
Food would be produced for the purpose of providing nutrition and not profit so it'll be as good as "natural
All parts of town will be fine, walkable bikeable ,and most important with robust public transport.
Their job will be useful and thus fulfillg. Lol at it is now btw
Their boss will be, you know.
Their environment will be orders of magnitude better. Their kids won't burn. Climate refugees won't be shot.
Crime will be less due to people having their needs met.
Every facet of this nerds life will be better.
I think you need to detach your concepts of material development level from political development level.
Please elaborate
Places can be nice to live in because they are materially wealthy, even if politically they are backwards and shitty or even have laws targeting your identity specifically. And politically advanced places like Cuba can be poor and thus not as nice to live in comparatively.
Cuba looks nice af on Google maps. Their rural areas much nicer than the US's. They also have higher literacy, lower infant mortality, same life expectancy, no homeless, lower crime, fewer prisoners and a nice island breeze. They do all this with none of the wealth the us has. Like what is your point exactly?
You are deluding yourself if you think that level of material wealth does not matter.
What do you mean nice to live in btw?
Probably treats