this post was submitted on 01 May 2026
94 points (99.0% liked)

Slop.

857 readers
477 users here now

For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] WokePalpatine@hexbear.net 15 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Streamers aren't petite-bourgeois unless they're extracting surplus value from editors or something.

[–] Cowbee@hexbear.net 35 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

You don't need to extract surplus value from workers to be petite bourgeoisie, self-employed people with autonomy are also petite bourgeois. What makes someone petite bourgeoisie is the fact that they own some capital, but also must themselves work, even if they employ others. Streamers that make their income from streaming are petite bourgeoisie.

[–] WokePalpatine@hexbear.net 5 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

No, you're wrong.

they own some capital

What capital does a streamer own? And what does this capital do that isn't the extraction of surplus value?

[–] Cowbee@hexbear.net 36 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Streamers are performance artists. They usually own their streaming setups, and take donations or sell subscriptions for private streams. When you own your own means of production, your labor is not being exploited. Streamers do use platforms where capitalists own them, but streamers are not proletarianized by them, and it's closer to a business owner paying rent to a landlord. The subclass "artisan" is most applicable, and has been recognized as part of the petite bourgeoisie since Marx.

They also sell commodities they fashion, not their labor power for a wage or piece-wage, the commodity being entertainment. They are not selling their labor-power to their viewers, but the direct product of their labor-power, to which the platform takes a cut as rent.

Prolewiki's article on the Petite Bourgeoisie backs this up:

The petite bourgeoisie or petty bourgeoisie is the lower strata of the bourgeoisie, consisting of smaller-scale merchants, semi-autonomous peasants, small business owners, self-employed individuals with complete autonomy, and other business owners who own enough means of production to extract surplus value but not wealthy enough to subsist solely off that extraction, in contrast to the haute bourgeoisie. Therefore, they must also perform labour alongside their employees.

This coincides with the class outlook of self-employed people, who seek individual autonomy over collective bargaining (on average), whereas proletarian workers tend to come to the class outlook seeking collectivization. Artisinal reaction was covered by Marx. Independent artists struggle against proletarianization in a similar way to small business owners and other self-employed individuals. They can also be allied with the proletariat, due to their precarious social position.

Of all the classes that stand face to face with the bourgeoisie today, the proletariat alone is a really revolutionary class. The other classes decay and finally disappear in the face of Modern Industry; the proletariat is its special and essential product.

The lower middle class, the small manufacturer, the shopkeeper, the artisan, the peasant, all these fight against the bourgeoisie, to save from extinction their existence as fractions of the middle class. They are therefore not revolutionary, but conservative. Nay more, they are reactionary, for they try to roll back the wheel of history. If by chance, they are revolutionary, they are only so in view of their impending transfer into the proletariat; they thus defend not their present, but their future interests, they desert their own standpoint to place themselves at that of the proletariat.

[–] ColombianLenin@hexbear.net 8 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Fine then labor aristocracy. At this point, potato potato.

[–] WokePalpatine@hexbear.net 14 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

They're not even that, they're probably equivalent to, like, sportsmen. Disposable job-lottery winners who are generally unskilled and lucky. I think they realize that and that's why they're so reactionary, thinking it hides how useless they are to society and how precarious their class position is.

Edit: also why their bases are so anti-"cancel culture" because they're one of the few jobs where it actually works because it's easy to abstain from some streamer dipshit than it is boycotting a food company.

[–] Cowbee@hexbear.net 5 points 3 weeks ago

I know I explained here, but the reason artisans like streamers tend to be reactionary is because, like the rest of the petite bourgeoisie, they stand to lose their autonomy. The petite bourgeoisie as a broad class collectively tend to value independence and fight against losing their autonomy.

This is the precariousness they have, whereas the proletariat has already lost their independence and so seeks collectivization. The petite bourgeoisie lose their independence through collectivization, but depending on the level of class struggle can actually side with the proletariat despite this against a common enemy, the haute bourgeoisie.

[–] Cowbee@hexbear.net 9 points 3 weeks ago

To be clear, they are petite bourgeoisie, I explained how and why here. The reason they tend to be reactionary is because their class position as petite bourgeoisie is precarious, as they stand to lose their autonomy and become proletarianized. However, the petite bourgeoisie can be allied with the proletariat against the haute bourgeoisie.

[–] QuietCupcake@hexbear.net 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Don't they almost always do that, though? I don't know, I don't really pay attention to streamers, but I was under the possibly mistaken impression that streamers tend to have a group of employees doing all the tech shit (like editing), "research" and marketing, and even things like makeup for them. At least once they are big enough to make a decent living off it. That's not the case?

[–] Cowbee@hexbear.net 16 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

They are petite bourgeoise with or without workers under them, as self-employed individuals and not proletarianized they fall into the broad category of petite bourgeoisie, such as artisans. They cease to be petite and become haute when they have enough capital to live off of the labor of others, and work by choice to maximize earnings, rather than necessity, so Mr. Beast would fall into haute bourgeoisie.