therealmove [none/use name]
Low wages in the South is due to low labor productivity relative to the North. 100,000 US steel workers produce about the same amount of steel as 600,000 Indian workers. When it comes to agriculture, which employs 43% of Indians, the average American farm worker is around 50 times more productive. 6 million Chinese textile workers produce 7 times more garments than 4 million Bangladeshi workers etc.
Always love a good grift
Non-productive workers do not “exploit” the productive workers. The textile factories cannot compete or sell anything without advertisements and without having sea transportation. Besides, does the example of a single industry prove your point, as wrong as it is? As I already mentioned, the vast majority of capitalist investment is within nations, and a significant chunk of FDI is between industrialized nations.
The next paragraphs : "However, a mass working-class audience for anti-racist, anti-sexist and anti-militarist ideas will most likely be created in the context of mass, class struggles against capital. Today, the main audience for the idea that workers need to stand up to right-wing ideas and practices are the small layer of rank and file activists who are trying to promote solidarity, militancy and democracy in the labor movement.
Only if these activists, with the help of socialists in the labor movement, can succeed in building effective collective fight back will these ideas – the politics of class radicalism – achieve mass resonance." Good luck building a labor movement while saying things like “white men are the biggest complainers”.
Yeah, it’s reactionary by nurture lol.
Of course, so that’s why you have to, by necessity, somehow reach out to them and find solidarity.
The links I posted explains how workers in first world countries do not really benefit from imperialism.
Imperialist investment, particularly in the global South, represents a tiny portion of global capitalist investment. (19) Foreign direct investment makes up only 5% of total world investment – that is to say, 95% of total capitalist investment takes place within the boundaries of each industrialized country.
Of that five percent of total global investment that is foreign direct investment, nearly three-quarters flow from one industrialized country – one part of the global North – to another. Thus only 1.25% of total world investment flows from the global North to the global South.
Prior to 1995 total profits earned by U.S. companies abroad exceeded 4% of total U.S. wages only once, in 1979. Foreign profits as a percentage of total U.S. wages rose above 5% only in 1997, 2000 and 2002, and rose slightly over 6% in 2003. If we hold to our estimate that half of total foreign profits are earned from investment in the global South, only 1–2% of total U.S. wages for most of the nearly 50 years prior to 1995 – and only 2–3% of total U.S. wages in the 1990s – could have come from profits earned in Africa, Asia and Latin America.
Yes I want you to pick one that you think is valid. The disagreement here is about a particular idea or thought that is introduced into the socialist movement by people, usually non-workers, who want to educate the working class. I couldn’t care less about the tone Marx had in his polemics. You began by talking about models and frameworks that Marx was a “goofball” for ignoring. You haven’t given a single example.
EDIT : I don’t mean to turn this into a debate. I’m genuinely interested in hearing about people’s disagreements with Marx. Obviously Marx isn’t infallible and anyone who has actually managed to prove part or whole of his theory was wrong or misleading would be doing a great service to scientific socialism.
N-word : OFF ON
I haven’t laughed this hard in ages, thank you OP.
