I was in the loungeroom mindlessly watching the television while eating dinner the other day. I was watching a show (the name of which escapes me) about a rich family. The show was supposed to be a comedy, and displayed the rich in a very satirical sense. Watching the show reminded me of how much I dislike the bourgeoisie.
Now don’t get me wrong, I’m certainly no Communist or Leftist. I am indeed critical of capitalism, but do not hate it with the same fervor as the pencil necked, pasty faced university socialists. By in large, those on the Left have a pathological hatred for capitalism because it is an economic system that (usually) rewards the most successful.
This creates a hierarchical system, one in which the miserable Leftist can not compete. My skepticism of capitalism is not inspired by a dislike of my own social status, but due to how much the economic system has contributed to the de-nationalisation of Australia.
I think the Right need to take a closer look at the system that they so often passionately defend. Not only should a critique of capitalism occur on both sides of the political spectrum, but a critique of the rich and powerful. Those who are exceptionally affluent and wealthy were referred to by our Communist friends as the ‘bourgeoisie’. Ironically, the bourgeoisie are often now the Communists themselves, the working class has abandoned Marxism.
This brings me back to the television show. It reminded me of just how much the bourgeoisie, in a general sense, lead a parasitic and artificial existence. Added to the bourgeoisie class for the most part are the ‘intellectuals’ at universities. While these intellectuals do not flaunt the same affluence as their allies in the corporate world, they do indeed belong to the bourgeoisie.
The intellectual, much like a majority of the people raised in bourgeoise households, have no real understanding of the natural world. They, for the most part, do not understand and do not wish to understand the value of real labour.
Furthermore, the bourgeoise man has an inflated ego incomparable to their working class counterpart. For the years they have spent buried in books written by other aloof people, the working man has been constructing with his hands, living life day to day in a hyper socialised environment that is most often alien to the bourgeoise.
I do not want to analyse the class systems in this writing piece. I just wanted to write about how I much prefer the working class to the bourgeoisie class. I do not have a false relationship with the working class like the Communist professor in University on a $100K+ salary. My source of income comes quite literally from labouring. My ‘education’ in law comes from University. I experience, weekly, living with both strata of society.
From my own experiences, the working man is a more social animal. The working man is not hyper focused on the political environment, and aroused with the idea of virtue signalling in the next conversation he has with a new immigrant or homosexual about how he too, hates the bad orange man President. Perhaps most importantly, the working man knows how to have fun and socialise.
The bourgeoisie man is certainly a different breed of animal. He is usually selfish, anti-social, left wing, feminine and perhaps most importantly of all, boring. Their souls have been ripped from beneath them, and their brains have been loaded with ideas and concepts thought of by other people. In the time it took them to get ‘educated’, their natural wisdom left the chat group.
I have an exceptionally harsh perspective on the rich and intellectuals. Especially politically. The man of action does more for a movement at one rally than an intellectual will ever do in his entire lifetime.
Sure, intellectuals may be of some worth to people already in power, for the purposes of policy direction, but by in large; theories that the masses do not understand will not help grow a nationalist populist movement.
It’s fine if an intellectual understands this, but they most often don’t, and in
Probably ironic, due to the fact that this article is not an act, but an exercise in my own thinking. Oh well, we are all hypocrites in one way or another.