4 ms·

This seemed like a good article that addressed ideas I had while watching. Alienation in the traditional Marxist perspective relates to the working class. But i

This seemed like a good article that addressed ideas I had while watching. Alienation in the traditional Marxist perspective relates to the working class. But it's interesting to consider the implications for many "upper class" tech workers (many of those who browse this site) who are still bound by IP and trade secret laws and are effectively insulated from the fruits of their labor.

hackerlight 4y ago
Hannah Arendt thinks that alienation (defined more broadly and in a way that's less ideologically rigid than in Marxist thought) is a precursor to totalitarianism. Intriguing and probably partly true. https://aeon.co/essays/for-hannah-arendt-totalitarianism-is-rooted-in-loneliness https://aeon.co/essays/for-hannah-arendt-totalitarianism-is-...
rexpop 4y ago
As a tech worker, I make $X/mo in wages and pay $X/3 in rent. In what way am I "upper" (and not "working" ) class?
- drekipus 4y ago
  You should read the Gulag archipelago. Tip: "the enemy" is whoever we don't feel like we want at the time. Nothing personal.
  - rexpop 4y ago
    I've read it, and I'm sure it isn't relevant to this conversation.
- texaslonghorn5 4y ago
  Fair point, I meant for the quotes to function as scare quotes, and working class (or maybe even upper-middle or middle class in scare quotes) would have been more appropriate. More generally, what I was going for was that many tech workers would think this doesn't apply to them. In particular, for me, "working class" conjures a historical picture of union factory jobs (steel, auto) and I have a hard time viscerally mapping that to tech. If you don't have this same implicit bias then sorry for the confusion and congrats for not having this bias.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 4y ago
  Under that formulation, anyone can be working class just by scaling up the ambition of their housing arrangements. Bezos' penthouse in NYC has an imputed rent of about $4M/year. If we are to consider folks who make $12M/year or less working class, then it kinda ruins the usefulness of the category, considering substantially 100% of the population would be in it.
- oarabbus_ 4y ago
  If you're upper-middle class (which describes the majority of tech workers), you aren't part of the working class, by definition. Most definitions of working-class include individuals in low-paying, unskilled and/or manual labor jobs. If you're a tech worker in a major city and your take-home pay is $5000 and your rent is $1600, the fact you're spending $X/3 on rent is a choice. You are probably living in an area of your choice, have some amenities of your choice, you have a place to yourself or at least a private bathroom, etc. The working class isn't afforded that luxury. The fact someone you know lives in a $4000/mo high rise you cannot afford does not make you working class. If you could quit your job and survive for a year without going on welfare, you likely aren't working class. If your car broke tomorrow and you could get a replacement without significant financial hardship, you likely aren't working class. I don't know if that's actually your salary or rent, but such numbers are typical for tech workers in places like SF and NYC (and of course many make significantly more than this). If your rent is significantly higher than the median mortgage ($1200) you probably aren't working class. >Pew Research defines the upper class as adults whose annual household income is more than double the national median. >Household income, as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau, refers to the combined gross cash income of all members of a household, defined as a group of people living together, who are 15 years or older. That is ~135k (pretax) in the USA, and perhaps 40% higher for a state like CA. This is actually a rather conservative definition: take the median family income (which can include two working adults and also working children), double that number, and include anyone making _more_ than that.
  - UIUC_06 4y ago
    Of course you're aware that the "working class," as you've defined it so well, has pretty definitively abandoned the Democratic party.
    - jjj123 4y ago
      That seems irrelevant to the discussion?
      - UIUC_06 4y ago

hackerlight 4y ago

Hannah Arendt thinks that alienation (defined more broadly and in a way that's less ideologically rigid than in Marxist thought) is a precursor to totalitarianism. Intriguing and probably partly true. https://aeon.co/essays/for-hannah-arendt-totalitarianism-is-rooted-in-loneliness https://aeon.co/essays/for-hannah-arendt-totalitarianism-is-...

rexpop 4y ago

As a tech worker, I make $X/mo in wages and pay $X/3 in rent. In what way am I "upper" (and not "working" ) class?

drekipus 4y ago
You should read the Gulag archipelago. Tip: "the enemy" is whoever we don't feel like we want at the time. Nothing personal.
- rexpop 4y ago
  I've read it, and I'm sure it isn't relevant to this conversation.
texaslonghorn5 4y ago
Fair point, I meant for the quotes to function as scare quotes, and working class (or maybe even upper-middle or middle class in scare quotes) would have been more appropriate. More generally, what I was going for was that many tech workers would think this doesn't apply to them. In particular, for me, "working class" conjures a historical picture of union factory jobs (steel, auto) and I have a hard time viscerally mapping that to tech. If you don't have this same implicit bias then sorry for the confusion and congrats for not having this bias.
asdfasgasdgasdg 4y ago
Under that formulation, anyone can be working class just by scaling up the ambition of their housing arrangements. Bezos' penthouse in NYC has an imputed rent of about $4M/year. If we are to consider folks who make $12M/year or less working class, then it kinda ruins the usefulness of the category, considering substantially 100% of the population would be in it.
oarabbus_ 4y ago
If you're upper-middle class (which describes the majority of tech workers), you aren't part of the working class, by definition. Most definitions of working-class include individuals in low-paying, unskilled and/or manual labor jobs. If you're a tech worker in a major city and your take-home pay is $5000 and your rent is $1600, the fact you're spending $X/3 on rent is a choice. You are probably living in an area of your choice, have some amenities of your choice, you have a place to yourself or at least a private bathroom, etc. The working class isn't afforded that luxury. The fact someone you know lives in a $4000/mo high rise you cannot afford does not make you working class. If you could quit your job and survive for a year without going on welfare, you likely aren't working class. If your car broke tomorrow and you could get a replacement without significant financial hardship, you likely aren't working class. I don't know if that's actually your salary or rent, but such numbers are typical for tech workers in places like SF and NYC (and of course many make significantly more than this). If your rent is significantly higher than the median mortgage ($1200) you probably aren't working class. >Pew Research defines the upper class as adults whose annual household income is more than double the national median. >Household income, as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau, refers to the combined gross cash income of all members of a household, defined as a group of people living together, who are 15 years or older. That is ~135k (pretax) in the USA, and perhaps 40% higher for a state like CA. This is actually a rather conservative definition: take the median family income (which can include two working adults and also working children), double that number, and include anyone making _more_ than that.
- UIUC_06 4y ago
  Of course you're aware that the "working class," as you've defined it so well, has pretty definitively abandoned the Democratic party.
  - jjj123 4y ago
    That seems irrelevant to the discussion?
    - UIUC_06 4y ago