podcasts

There is a difference between owning your shop and having family work there, and owning a store where people work for money, for one success of the store means direct results for petit bourgeoisie, while not so much for owned store with strangers. For two, familial relations in 19th century where wife and kids are property of the man, in a sense. Unless you want to go full tilt into unquantifiable reproductive labor being unfairly compensated by a husband because he doesn’t directly pay his wife, and thus all man are bourgeoisie before 20th century, you have to treat family as a unit and avoid those questions and deal with economic transactions.

For petit bourgeoisie their labor being valorized (turned into money) is very direct relationship, they work “better” they get exactly proportional “better” compensation, there is no boss (aside from society/market), which grades them on some incomprehensible metrics. They are a servant of market conditions, their work easily wiped out by haute bourgeoisie (say, walmart) and workers getting paid more than them (say google code monkey) brings burning hatred in them, thus they hate and envy the former, and disregard and hate for the latter. If you pay attention, frequently more precise marxists would say petit bourgeois morality to cast labor aristocracy into them, as the middle class is composed of those two types, but they are not petit bourgeois, they just share same fears and striving, even if they are different in relationships of production

You can make vague case that labor aristocracy possesses some kind of inbuilt labor valorizer in their resume/certificates/skillsets, and that’s what makes them closer to morality of petit bourgeois as owning their own means of production (exotic skills which they own), but eh