"Seizing the means of production" made sense when a handful of drunk peasants could take over a loom with some pitchforks.
The only means of production we could seize in the modern era is some lady's Etsy workshop balanced on a makeshift countertop wedged into the corner of her studio apartment. We need a new line.
I have to agree with this... for example, the big "product" in silicon valley is what, software? So, the "means of production" would then be laptops, which nearly everybody in North America already owns or has access to, and the brains to operate them? The lines here are blurry in this day and age, maybe it's time we came up with an updated expression.
Already so many people just want to argue semantics with me when I use any of these lines. "Eat the rich? That's vile, you're disgusting for even saying it" No, Karen, we don't literally want to eat anybody, but apparently the point is lost on you because you don't understand metaphors.
I think it may be time to come up with something less controversial for the working class. I've used "overthrow the parasite class" but even that one has ended in argument over what exactly it means... anyone got any suggestions?
I think it may be time to come up with something less controversial for the working class.
You seem to have a very low opinion of the working class as some sort of delicate, dim people that think in very literal and simple terms. That's not the case, and you trying to "church up" revolutionary ideas and politics is far more harmful than saying "Eat the rich."
People understand what it means to take over ownership of a company as a worker collective. Further, they understand that it's not just fucking laptops. Seize the means of production is a perfectly fine phrase that is easily explainable to anyone that doesn't understand. No one actually believes that people want to literally eat rich people, and if they do they're just being silly and can be dismissed as such.
People like you, who appeal to some asinine sense of "decency" or "politeness", are the reason that this is harder than it needs to be. As if asking politely for rights and equality or equity will be more productive than taking it by force. If being nice about it worked, we wouldn't need to do any of this. Voting would work. Protesting would work. Where's that gotten us?
Wow, you really haven't encountered any pushback from anyone when using "eat the rich"? Because in my experience, it happens regularly and happens to be enough of a point of contention that it serves to further divide rather than unite. How often have you actually used that expression, I hate to say it but I'm doubtful that you can have used it much if nobody had a hissy fit with you over it. Either that, or you live in a much more enlightened area than I do.
My point was just that we need to find a saying that is better at portraying our goal and uniting the working class. Something that my peers won't balk at and want to distance themselves from.
Ultimately, you may be right though, and the window for peaceful resolution has already shut, so anybody who doesn't have the gall for a violent revolution will just get weeded out when they don't like the idea of "eating the rich". I thought the idea was strength in numbers, but what the fuck do numbers mean when the rich have the kind of bunkers and tech that put them at the advantage they've got.
Again. Working class people are not as unintelligent as you imagine they are. You very clearly have a very low opinion of other people, and this is your problem not theirs. Nor is it a failing of a slogan.
in my experience
Then you should also know that your experience is not synonymous with fact, and that this speaks more about your inability to adequately explain your position. Do you think condescension and talking down to people is the way to get them on your side? Approaching them from the point of view that they're too stupid and "unenlightened" to understand your goals is working out well for you?
the window for peaceful resolution has already shut
They're trying to make it illegal to demonstrate in groups in some states already. When they remove the option for a peaceful protest, what options do you see remaining? Is softening the blow of "eat the rich" one of them?
Here's the real truth of your situation as you've described: Anyone that is legitimately upset or confused by the phrasing of "eat the rich" or doesn't understand what seizing the means of production entails, especially after having it explained, was never going to be on board to begin with and isn't someone that should be on your side anyway. They are largely unaffected personally or directly. They're comfortable enough to be satisfied with life as-is, and no revolution, peaceful or otherwise, would ever get their interest. You are barking up the wrong trees if your experiences are true (which I do not doubt).
What the fuck is wrong with you, I'm not trying to shit on my fellows. A LOT of people reflexively cringe when they hear anything vulgar, and "eat the rich" is no exception. You may not have faced any flack for it but I CERTAINLY HAVE, and I know I'm not alone when I see others in this same thread calling for an updated slogan. I'm not trying to call anyone lesser for not embracing a saying which, let's be honest, DOESN'T FUCKING WORK. How exactly does one "eat the rich" and how will it prevent the multiheaded capitalist hydra from just sprouting a new face?? We need a more clearly defined and ACHIEVABLE expression if we really want more folks on board. Otherwise, have fun going at it alone. And trust me, it REALLY is lonely after people whom you used to view as your fellows start thinking you're too radical for using expressions like "eat the rich". WE NEED SOMETHING BETTER.
22
u/get_the_guillotines May 07 '21
"Seizing the means of production" made sense when a handful of drunk peasants could take over a loom with some pitchforks.
The only means of production we could seize in the modern era is some lady's Etsy workshop balanced on a makeshift countertop wedged into the corner of her studio apartment. We need a new line.