37
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 02 Jan 2024
37 points (100.0% liked)
askchapo
22692 readers
150 users here now
Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.
Rules:
-
Posts must ask a question.
-
If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.
-
Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.
-
Try !feedback@hexbear.net if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
Chicken and egg situation. It's more likely that reactionaries are drawn to those positions if they lack capital to live passively off of but enough wealth, borrowed or inherited, to pursue professional training and education.
PMCs in politics are more likely to be reactionaries since they understand their social and class privileges stem from capitalist exploitation and status quo power relations rather than creating mass politics. e.g: Corbyn's Labour camp undermine him to his own detriment, or Kyrsten Sinema being a social worker before being a US senator.
Ironically, it is these people that also make revolution possible and happen. These professionals are compensated so well because they are the very administrators of capital, of empire, of the machines of production, distribution, and consumption. If they lose faith in the system, not necessarily by a crisis of conscience, but by which means they no longer see a viable future for themselves and their kin/progeny/colleagues, then revolutionary moments gain the possibility of becoming realized and fulfilled.
Which is why the state also increases its own powers to monitor, spy, and repress when targeting dissidents and enforcing internal discipline.