Posted on 06/24/2015 8:29:33 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Yep- they want the little folks to revolt, and then after we kill each other and the police, and we are all weakened by the fighting, they plan on pulling a Hugo Chavez and just make their dictatorship permanent.
They pulled the same crap in Russia, piggybacking on an earlier revolution.
poverty doesn’t lead to terrorism, no matter what the left wish it to be. Entitlement leads to terrorism
Lol, boy, they are so stupid. I swear, they are the dumbest people on Earth. They are in the bottom percentile (they’re probably outraged because three million people are in the bottom percentile and they are being held there by evil capitalists).
NY Times agitates “Workers of the world... unite!”
lol
Reagan was not a Communist, Muslim, illegal alien terrorist. That is, if memory serves.
the ‘poor’ in america receive benefits afforded someone making $40k/yr
why would they complain when they get everything for free with little to no effort?
EBT. SNAP. Welfare. Medicare. Obamaphone. Section 8. etc etc etc. There is an endless supply of gibsmedat to keep the poor happy and fat. There is no reason to better yourself when you qualify for a lifetime of comfort on welfare benefits.
"Stand up, Chuck!"
Rise up? They already Vote for a Living.
Anything more will require them to do some Hard Work.
The real reason, there is no real suffering for most of the Poor. No suffering, no incentive to improve their Life circumstances. Section 8, EBT, Medicaid and every other Welfare Scheme the Liberals can think up.
Heck, hunting for all the Free Goodies is a Full Time Job.
The Politicos make sure their Voting Base (the Poor) is taken care of, even the Illegal Invaders that can’t Legally Vote, wink, wink...
First off, WE have no poor in the US. End of premise presented.
Hey, David Samuels, political scientist at the University of Minnesota.....
How ‘bout the poor storm YOUR house and forcibly redistribute all of your crap, you communist moron?
Well... no.
There is no equality in NK.
There is the upper class that lives in (nervous) luxury, the trade class that works in what would be called middle management and then there are the poor slubs on the bottom who are at the dubious mercy of the upper and trade class.
When it comes to equality the US is far more equal. Even poor people here do not eat tree bark and grass to live. They don't live in fear that some member of the upper class will find their daughter attractive and take her as a concubine.
why would they complain when they get everything for free with little to no effort?.....It ain’t enough. “I NEED Mo’, Mo’ MO’!”
“Why aren’t the poor storming the barricades?”
Storming the barricades requires EFFORT, something lacking in many poor people.
I’m guessing whoever wrote that hasn’t been poor. Revolt is a sport of rich kinds, the well to do, and academics. Walking in after two jobs, a person is tired.
Still, it’s possible that poverty is less grueling than in the past...
Yes, and the author does on to describe this in terms of the cost of luxury items such as televisions, computers, cell phones and appears to puzzle at the change in the relative cost of those to the individual without considering that the very contemplation of possession of those objects is so far out of the scope of anything Marxian social analysis considered as "poor" that we might as well be talking about Martians. Marx's proletariat were starving, illiterate, "immiserated", and as unlikely to use their cell phones to call for a delivery pizza as they were to conjure gold from dung. We are not talking about poverty here, not talking about people who contemplated a poor harvest and anticipated starvation. They're worried about obesity, for God's sake.
Hence the concern of social analysts who are contemplating the breakup of comfortable, easily-understood economic collectives in favor of the individual citizen, and yes, that will break up a tidy theory all right. This is not "individualization", it is not a trend, it has been with us since the beginning. Class is an artificial theoretical construct, and it cannot explain the existing social dynamic, and the social theorists are panicking because it's all they had, and it's wrong.
To be brief, the "poor" aren't storming the barricades because they aren't poor and they've a stake in the game. The idiots are the looters and they're losers unless men and women better than themselves pick them up out of it and guess what? The people doing so are middle class and working class and they're disgusted at the bums. Whence the proletariat? Gone, because they never were.
Each citizen turns out to be a member of multiple classes - the Frankfurt School insisted on this despite Marx's voluble protests, and they were correct as far as they went but didn't - couldn't - take it so far as to realize that class disappeared, and what was left is the individual. A black, female, white-collar worker or an Asian male truck driver are left with a choice of which class interest to pursue, to vote in this country, race, or economic class, or sex, or any of the classes of which they might be described a member. It boils down to their status as an individual, because they can vote any of these class interests and often do. These are not race or class traitors, they're individuals.
This is the reason that the individual, and not the class, is the proper repository of political rights in the United States. It is why social analysis based around class inevitably fails in the face of the reality of individuality. And it is absolutely right for that individual to consider himself or herself voting in favor of his or her own individual interests, not the interests of any class to which some social analyst says he or she belongs. It is, in fact, fundamental.
This is why any amount of class mobility utterly confounds the Marxian model. It was creaky enough before people started being a member of this six collectives one day, that six another. Or seven, or a hundred. Modeling individuals in bunches carries with it an inherent limitation, and the social analysts appear to be recognizing that to their dismay. They shouldn't be dismayed. This has been worked out for a very long time, and any political system that does not take it into account is fatally flawed from the outset.
Maybe “do” a bunch more Baltimore's or Ferguson's will do the trick! That's the ticket, burn down what left of your meager environment. Unfortunately Jim, with their “mental acuity,” that would probably make sense to far too many of them. And of course put a leash on the cops so that they don't have any interruptions.
“There are legitimate grounds for grievance. For those in the bottom quintile, household income in inflation-adjusted dollars has dropped sharply, from $13,787 in 2000 to $11,651 in 2013.”
Not counting government benefits they received, of course.
Or drugs and other contraband sold on the side.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.