Why should the proletariat produce wealth of the upper-classes?

Question

And not recreate society from below? A society with work-place democracy?

Give me one good reason.

*Produce wealth FOR

Answer 1

Because the wealthy produce wealth for the proletariat. Unfortunately for Marxism, it turns out it isn't a one way street. Look at the average member of the American proletariat now and during the colonial period. They are 200 times richer than before.

Certain types of work are by their nature, democratic, some are not. Manufacturing couldn't function democratically, a computer help desk team couldn't function autocratically, at least not well. Democracy also has faults. Look at people constantly trying to reallocate funds from other states into their own. That is clearly stealing, yet we glorify it.

Finally, the proletariat does constantly recreate society from below. Have you seen an i-Pod lately, that isn't from above.

Answer 2

The proletariat (or so the theory goes) produce wealth for the capital owning class because they get paid to do so. This payment is above what they could make on their own without the involvement of capital. Otherwise, the proletariat would not work for the capitalists.
The argument goes that the workers should have access to the fruits of their labors, and not just receive the minimum necessary to keep them involved in the system.

Answer 3

Have you ever been in a work-place democracy or co-op? Start one, and come back here and tell me your experience. There is no one authority, so people bicker and form alliances. There are elections, so every machination of political log rolling and manipulation and lying that goes in congress is writ small here. Inferior decisions are made, and made slowly, and no one is happy because everyone compromises to the majority will. What I describe is not that unusual in the workplace, since many workplaces have the appearance of 'democracy' - at least among the managerial classes, and everyone who goes to a staff meeting with managers that like to pretend to get staff input know how horrible these things are.

And the final point is that democracy at my workplace doesn't cure the real problem since I want a say over everyone's workplace. And that is just chaos. In fact, in places where they try this it fails immediately and small committees are formed and the companies simply write their own input and output schedules like a monopolist. The triumph of this thinking was the former Soviet Union.

Answer 4

That question is soooo far beyond the capabilities of 99% or more of the people on here. But my answer is this, they shouldnt. George Bush disagrees as do most republican economic ploicies but what the hell do I know. Unfortunately, the majority of academia has been brainwashed into genuflecting before the concept of diversity. The result is that the proletariat has nothing to unite them since they are brainwashed into accepting everything. I think that the populace will be pushed much further toward a police state and the disparity of wealth will be distributed like in a feudal state before they realize they have the power and will to change national policy. Call me crazy!!

Answer 5

Maybe you could describe what form of value the proletariat is producing to produce wealth.

Answer 6

If you go back in history, there has been 2,500 years of history where the proletariat has risen up and taken over. And every time they have tried it, they failed. You can read stories of people revolting in ancient Greek city-states in 500B.C. and setting up socialist states. They never worked. Communism in Russia is one of the more recent attempts. Mugabe is currently trying to institute socialism in Zimbabwe. He will fail. Having the rich rule us is unfair, but it works better than socialism.

Answer 7

Because they are weaker than the upper-class. It's not an accident that some people are stronger than others. God made it that way. As such, God has given the stronger or the fittest the ability to have domain over the weaker.

Answer 8

B.B. is watching