361
Support Sex Workers (europe.pub)
submitted 1 week ago by [M] to c/mop@quokk.au
76 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
Support Sex Workers
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 29 points 1 week ago* (13 children)

Marx did.

He considered sex workers part of the lumpenproletariat, the lowest of the low alongside drug addicts, thieves, unemployed, etc. and he viewed them as a dangerous class who could be bribed by the rich to turn against the proletariat.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 1 week ago (6 children)

    Sure he counted them to the lumpenproletariat, but do you have a text where he actually declares the lumpenproletariat enemy if the working class?

    Recalling from memory he saw them as victims of capitalism who deserve better...

    So he's not actually thinking they are class enemies by design. He thought its a class that shouldn't exist because the hardships they are forced to go through.

    He didn't want people forced into protitution by the system, I dont think he would have something against emancipated sex workers who work in the field from a desire to do so.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 1 week ago (5 children)

    Marx position was not about who shall be emancipated or not but who have an interest to struggle for the revolution. In his mind, a part of the proletariat was too precarious, and could be easily corrupt by the bourgeoisie. Such as thieves and cops.

    However with the development of the communists party and their propaganda around ouvrierism, the pride of workers turn to be the pride to work. The lumpen became a slur against people that do not work enough; a conception close to the far-right view of unemployed "parasites". That's why nobody use that term anymore, even if it's still accurate for cops and managers

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago* (4 children)

    I ask again, does anyone has a quote on that?

    I read the capital, the manifesto, the Feuerbach thesen and the 18the brumaire of Luis Bonaparte in German original and can't recall what you propose. But there are lots of other texts, so if what you say is source based, I am pleased to learn.

    "Lumpen" is German for rags, meaning the poorest of the poor, I can't imagine him using that for managers and the like, in another way than sarcastic. It would absolutely not fit into his theory of society.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    What I think the reference is to is

    The “dangerous class”, [lumpenproletariat] the social scum, that passively rotting mass thrown off by the lowest layers of the old society, may, here and there, be swept into the movement by a proletarian revolution; its conditions of life, however, prepare it far more for the part of a bribed tool of reactionary intrigue.

    from the chapter 1 of the 'festo, and even though it's harsh it does state that it's not an inevitability, but rather a more likely outcome.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago

    yeah, that's a cryout about the conditions they have to live under and that they are in danger of being bribed into doing actions that are actually against their material interest

    Its the opposite of saying "the material conditions make them an enemy of the working class"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago

    Their is what Marx said and whats marxists made of that. Again, this is poorly defined in Marx text and spread in a lot of them. You'd rather rely on people that study the lumpen as a context, maybe Jean-Claude Bourdin. However for orthodoxes : "From whore to pope, there is a mass of such rabble. But the honest and ‘working’ lumpenproletariat belongs here as well;" - Grundrisse

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 child)

    If you had read marx, you'd know that those are categories that show one's relation to means of production. For instance, an artisan isn't automatically a petite bourgeois or proletariat, it depends on if they own their MOP they work with.

    The few sex workers privileged/lucky enough to be relatively independent on onlyfans or other sites are petit bourgeois, those who work in countries where sex work is legalized and is essentially a day job for wage are proletarian, and those who do it illegally, likely under a pimp (who is also lumpen) and/or gangs, essentially being their asset is lumpenproletariat.

    The lumpen prostitute was pretty much the only type back then, and them + other lumpens such as thieves and thugs were actually mobilized by reactionaries to coup the French government (18th Brumaire) during Marx's time, thus the analysis that, again, they could be mobilized by reaction.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago*

    Yeah, and he clearly states they are misled into being reactionary because obviously its in their material interest to abolish the private ownership of production, as they suffer the most from it.

    Anyone can be bribed Into actions which are against his class interest, but because the lumpenproletariat is so poor and desperate, the cost of bribing them is much lower and therefore the risk of them being bribed in relevant numbers into being reactionary much greater

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    If Marx gets to edit out the parts of Hegel he didn't like, then I get to do the same with Marx.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •