English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

12 answers

...that the working class belongs to each other, world-wide.

2007-10-12 19:18:04 · answer #1 · answered by Dinah 7 · 2 0

I think he meant that the non-represented/ under-represented Working Class is a universal issue, not within the confines of any one country/government/ruling system.

Additionally, I think he meant that statement as a counter to democratic ideas about government working for the people, as the Working Class has a lesser voice in democratic systems (because money and clout move the democratic process).

2007-10-12 19:25:58 · answer #2 · answered by dlb_blair 4 · 1 0

He meant the working class doesn't have the power or authority a nation has. Things like trade routes and spheres of influence and military power are meaningless to the working class. He was specifically criticizing Nationalism.

However, he was operating under a false premise. A nation, as any other group, is nothing more than the lump sum of all the individuals in it. That is the core belief behind democracy. The individuals within a country, regardless of their "class," are the very ones who create trade routes and spheres of influence and military power.

2007-10-12 19:22:18 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

the proletariat dont own anything. The ruling elite own everything. Think about it we live as almost permanent indentured servants. You "buy" a house and pay usury thru the nose. Even though I have a 15 yr loan on my house I just now after 3 yrs of paying have come to the point where more of my payment goes to principle than to interest.

2007-10-12 20:52:03 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

The "working class" is just that, a class, they are found in every country and even if they were to have a country all their own, someone stills governs them and so another class is created.

2007-10-12 19:19:49 · answer #5 · answered by Puppy Owner 2 · 0 1

The interests of the proletariat would trump nationalist sentiments. Since the nation itself is largely a construction designed to protect capital, the worker would realize how the nation was a part of their exploitation.

2007-10-12 19:36:26 · answer #6 · answered by student_of_life 6 · 1 0

He was saying that the working class are slaves to the rich and powerful who "own" the country.

Of course, communism as it turns out was a failed ideology.

2007-10-12 19:18:26 · answer #7 · answered by Wocka wocka 6 · 1 1

Who cares? Communism/Socialism have caused over a billion deaths on the planet and those systems are fundamentally screwball. To hell with them.

2007-10-12 19:18:11 · answer #8 · answered by SQD 2 · 1 1

He meant that conservatives are being betrayed by their country when they are forced to pay welfare to able-bodied bums that sit around all day watching TV.

2007-10-12 19:20:49 · answer #9 · answered by qwert 7 · 0 1

He thought the interests of the Worker overwhelmed National feelings - boy was he wrong. In this and so many other things.

2007-10-12 19:18:03 · answer #10 · answered by Mike1942f 7 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers