/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

Can you even define a "lumpen" as a class?

>>495977
>romanticizing lumpen
It's 2026 and you're still using this retarded claim. Nobody is "romanticizing" anything. You talk about the segments of the working class as though they're some distant thing for us to fantasize about, but it's not the case. I don't have to "romanticize" anything; I'm lumpen, and I have plenty of experience with others in this strata. I make no broad positive or negative claims about lumpenproles; no pedestals, no moralistic condemnations, our class status is related to our material conditions, and I don't believe, from my experience, that this inherently results in reactionary behaviors as an entire strata.

By contrast, the capitalist propaganda which perpetually incites working people against other working people, and perpetually obfuscates the crimes of the rich while condemning the crimes (and supposed crimes) of low-level workers, is by its nature reactionary, and it's very telling that this is the only thing you focus on perpetuating when you come here and make your same old strawman argument about how everybody on the left today totally thinks lumpenproles are magic negros who spray sunshine out of their butts.

>Bukele is super popular
Also super mobbed up. An insanely corrupt guy whose actual programme is based around incorporation of large drug cartels' influence into state policy, and heavy backing from the U.S.

>lumpens can be tools of reaction like fascist paramilitias
Weird thing to argue while also shilling for Bukele. I'm told (by you every time you post this dumb argument) to uncritically believe that fascist paramilitaries are popular with the working class, so if your argument is that lumpens are inherently fascistic, then what's the problem? That's popular, or at least seems to be if you evaluate nothing else and don't take any other factors into account.

Marx's tirade about the lumpenproletariat, his most famous one, besides being a short part of a broader bibliography whose ire was focused far more against capitalists, landlords, etc. than against lumpen (unlike bourgeois propaganda, which incites especially against lumpenproles), was also distinctly moralistic. It's far, far, far away from the height of material analysis when he's basically just complaining about hookers and organ grinders without the consideration for what forces place them in these roles. With industrial workers or agrarian peasants, he has no such blindness, yet material conditions disappear the moment a man with a hurdy gurdy and a monkey plays a song for a ha'penny. It is bad analysis from two authors who otherwise wrote very good analysis.

>>495981
… but with that said, there are two aspects which are still insightful. First, the concept of the lumpenprole itself comes from it, and second the description of the "reserve army of labor" actually is helpful and useful and you can actually understand the situation better if you focus on this aspect of the analysis and not all the shit where Marx is seething over how much he personally hates prostitutes. Seething over hookers isn't worth shit; a Fascist can blame the hookers for moral rot and seethe over it and incite, and those who have not been relegated to the positions of whores (yet) might cheer. It's worth much more to understand why lumpens exist, and to use that understanding to create a society with more educated people and more opportunities which produces less need for people to became prostitutes or beggars.