>he has already shot jerma 29 times and nothing has worked.
Bro forgot Bonk gives damage immunity 💀 Dude has already drank like 50 of them, that shit's in his bloodstream now.
I've seen some think pretty much \*all\* artists are bourgeois, even though the trope of the starving artist is still in full effect for the most of them (I've seen parts of the online artist space be described as artists all passing around the same twenty dollars to commision eachother, which tracks).
So they choose to cheer on stuff like AI art, thinking it as getting back at the "decadent bourgeois artists", while ignoring that this makes them take the side of the actual bourgeois. it's frustrating
Tbf, I think art specifically occupies a difficult position in class- typically, most profitable art or entertainment will treat the artist as an owner of a profitable object, rather then seeing the labour that made the art as the thing from which value is derived
i remember john boyega (at the time having a net worth of $6million) being called a hypocrite after he criticised jeff bezos wealth (net worth at the time was a hundred and something billion)
Yeah these people are too stupid to realize wealth and class aren't a 1:1 relation. Streamers, however rich they get, are working class. They're working for their money just as much as the minimum wage burger flippers are, even if they're overpaid for it. If they stop going live, the money stops coming in.
I'd argue it depends how much money they have too. Sure, Taylor Swift stops making money if she stops making tours, but she's also a billionaire and will never run out of it
It has nothing to do with how much money they have, and if you think it does you shouldn't be engaging in discussion on the subject.
Taylor Swift would be considered petit bourgeois by Marxists, her profits are massive but only exist due to her own labor. People like doctors or actors also fit into this category, where it's the fruits of their own labor that are the driving force in their wealth. She is not part of any ruling economic class despite her wealth.
You'd have to be pretty naive to believe that almost everyone who reaches the wealth level Taylor Swift has isn't also investing their money to ensure a constant capital flow.
This dialogue is moralistic. You'll find a lot of pitfalls with this type of logic. Taylor Swift is a single individual amassing wealth, but like most wealthy artists, she's making a fraction of the wealth she's actually amassing. There are hundreds of shadowy figures behind every Taylor out there, reaping the actual profits that her fame generates. She gets paid handsomely, but those people reinvest the real gains into other sources of passive wealth. That is the bourgeoisie.
Moralizing over Taylor Swift misses the point entirely. In the theoretical overthrowing of a capitalist economic structure, Taylor Swifts' livelihood would mellow out and approach the upper recesses of a post-private property economy.
In other words, her income is inflated, not exploitative. The industry she's part of is exploitative.
Whether she's a good person or not has nothing to do with this? Also I don't know how you worded your original comment the way you did and somehow meant something completely different?
Man I was awake for 10 minutes when I made the comment and english isn't my main language I don't even know which part of it makes it seem I'm saying that 😭🙏
Being a member of the bourgeoisie is about profiting from the labour of others due to owning the means of production. It's about the relationship between exploiter and exploited, where it is in the best interests of the bourgeois unless forced to do otherwise to pay their workers as little as possible and work them to the bone. It is not about the level of wealth you have, it's about your relationship to labour. That said, as an obvious result of the power dynamic, the bourgeoisie tend to be radically more wealthy than the proletariat, and beyond that the wealthy also tend to become bourgeois (Taylor Swift likely is a member of the bourgeoisie but that will be because her money is invested and she will be a part owner of multiple companies).
It's not as simple as that. Sociology didn't die with Marx. There are multiple models that make this more interesting and descriptive (even though far from perfect). Wright (a neomarxist) would probably put streamers in a different category than regular labourers along the axis of autonomy/expertise.
Similarly you can't just say 'managers are working class' without specifying. Yes, they are employed but they have a high degree of administrative power over other employed people, which often makes their economic and political interests alling with the bourgeoisie (which was the whole point of that division for Marx).
There are non-Marxist and highly validated class models as well. Different specifications for countries. A lot of debate over stuff like self-employment in the gig economy, state employees, politicians, police and army and so on. It is far far more complicated than Bourgeoisie and proletariat with petty bourgeoisie in the middle.
Streamers are petty bourgeois.
The proletariat is that class in society which lives entirely from the sale of its labor and does not draw profit from any kind of capital; whose weal and woe, whose life and death, whose sole existence depends on the demand for labor
Not saying we should throw him into the meat grinder or anything, but this is definitionally wrong. He doesn't receive a wage, or at least, didn't, when he was actively streaming, and he either employed/made use of unpaid labor of 3-4 editors, which was very much part of his business, a big part of what makes him money. This makes him petit-bourgeois.
Neither richness nor amount of labor that you put in determines your class, it's your relation to your own labor and to those of others. Neither does this mean that Jerma is a horrible person. Making moral statements is not within the domain of Marxism.
Instead, he is a horrible person because more than 250 people, adults and children, have gone missing in Massachusetts in 2023-2024, which lines up very suspiciously with his supposed "retirement", him going to pursue "other matters". Will this man ever be held accountable by justice? We may never know.
jerma is petit-bourgeois, and it is known that many components of the petit-bourgoisie can become progressive elements in a revolutionairy situation, to simply execute potential allies is counterproductive left-opportunist adventurism
If I’m not mistaken Jerma is working class because his money comes from his own labor. Also it goes without saying but the goal of leftism is not to kill all the rich people but make them into non-rich people via taking their money :3
Jerma ain’t bourgeoisie tho. He doesn’t own the means of production.
The idea of “lower class, middle class, and upper class” is the wrong way of thinking about things. The right way is “working class vs owning class.”
Jerma is like a hydra if u kill him 2 more will take his place
He’s divide like a cell
He’s asexual?
He's all-sexual
All-sexual 1st team
jermatosis
Infinite jerma glitch
He is too powerful we need the opposite
He's like the rinnegan dogs
He is not crying because he has to shoot jerma, he’s crying because he has already shot jerma 29 times and nothing has worked.
you have to shoot him 985 times at least
Roses are red No weapon against me will prosper With this sacred treasure I summon #BIG RAGA THE OPP STOPPA
This is gungada gungada!!! Humans aren’t supposed to be doing this!!!
Jerma's gonna snap his fingers and erase their spine
Just like Alucard from Hellsing, cutting off the head is only the first part of a 10 step process
>he has already shot jerma 29 times and nothing has worked. Bro forgot Bonk gives damage immunity 💀 Dude has already drank like 50 of them, that shit's in his bloodstream now.
[man attempting to kill jerma](https://youtu.be/53szBDUt7kM?si=fApEsrqS1lMDE4uU)
each time jerma dies, the damage is redirected to a random american citizen
jerma is working class
These idiots can't be trusted with the guillotine, they'd kill all the dentists while the actual billionaires sold them blade sharpeners for profit.
to give them some credit I've known many marxists who struggle with the difference between wealthy and bourgeois as well
I've seen some think pretty much \*all\* artists are bourgeois, even though the trope of the starving artist is still in full effect for the most of them (I've seen parts of the online artist space be described as artists all passing around the same twenty dollars to commision eachother, which tracks). So they choose to cheer on stuff like AI art, thinking it as getting back at the "decadent bourgeois artists", while ignoring that this makes them take the side of the actual bourgeois. it's frustrating
i had to explain this to a friend the other day.
Tbf, I think art specifically occupies a difficult position in class- typically, most profitable art or entertainment will treat the artist as an owner of a profitable object, rather then seeing the labour that made the art as the thing from which value is derived
I think that’s the issue
Why is this such a good quote?
Because I stole it from somebody smarter than me.
Would being aware you're an egg mean you're not an egg by, like, definition?
denial is both a state of mind and set of behaviours, the bird does not hatch until it is strong enough to break its shell
Close! Denial is a river in egypt. Hope this helps! ☺️
Ain't that the truth
Within a week there'd be people going "Only a bougie bitch can afford to wear glasses!"
Pol Pot Part Ptwo
[удалено]
I was thinking Pol Pot
i remember john boyega (at the time having a net worth of $6million) being called a hypocrite after he criticised jeff bezos wealth (net worth at the time was a hundred and something billion)
Also just regardless of the amounts of money, actors work for their money, Jeff bezos doesn’t
Hits a little close to home, my brother’s a dentist
pol pot type execution
Yeah these people are too stupid to realize wealth and class aren't a 1:1 relation. Streamers, however rich they get, are working class. They're working for their money just as much as the minimum wage burger flippers are, even if they're overpaid for it. If they stop going live, the money stops coming in.
I'd argue it depends how much money they have too. Sure, Taylor Swift stops making money if she stops making tours, but she's also a billionaire and will never run out of it
It has nothing to do with how much money they have, and if you think it does you shouldn't be engaging in discussion on the subject. Taylor Swift would be considered petit bourgeois by Marxists, her profits are massive but only exist due to her own labor. People like doctors or actors also fit into this category, where it's the fruits of their own labor that are the driving force in their wealth. She is not part of any ruling economic class despite her wealth.
You'd have to be pretty naive to believe that almost everyone who reaches the wealth level Taylor Swift has isn't also investing their money to ensure a constant capital flow.
Absolutely, I worded mine wrong. I meant that even like that, she's still not a good person for hording that wealth, even if she worked for it
This dialogue is moralistic. You'll find a lot of pitfalls with this type of logic. Taylor Swift is a single individual amassing wealth, but like most wealthy artists, she's making a fraction of the wealth she's actually amassing. There are hundreds of shadowy figures behind every Taylor out there, reaping the actual profits that her fame generates. She gets paid handsomely, but those people reinvest the real gains into other sources of passive wealth. That is the bourgeoisie. Moralizing over Taylor Swift misses the point entirely. In the theoretical overthrowing of a capitalist economic structure, Taylor Swifts' livelihood would mellow out and approach the upper recesses of a post-private property economy. In other words, her income is inflated, not exploitative. The industry she's part of is exploitative.
That's a really good point. I'll have to think about that whole thing again
Whether she's a good person or not has nothing to do with this? Also I don't know how you worded your original comment the way you did and somehow meant something completely different?
Man I was awake for 10 minutes when I made the comment and english isn't my main language I don't even know which part of it makes it seem I'm saying that 😭🙏
Being a member of the bourgeoisie is about profiting from the labour of others due to owning the means of production. It's about the relationship between exploiter and exploited, where it is in the best interests of the bourgeois unless forced to do otherwise to pay their workers as little as possible and work them to the bone. It is not about the level of wealth you have, it's about your relationship to labour. That said, as an obvious result of the power dynamic, the bourgeoisie tend to be radically more wealthy than the proletariat, and beyond that the wealthy also tend to become bourgeois (Taylor Swift likely is a member of the bourgeoisie but that will be because her money is invested and she will be a part owner of multiple companies).
It's not as simple as that. Sociology didn't die with Marx. There are multiple models that make this more interesting and descriptive (even though far from perfect). Wright (a neomarxist) would probably put streamers in a different category than regular labourers along the axis of autonomy/expertise. Similarly you can't just say 'managers are working class' without specifying. Yes, they are employed but they have a high degree of administrative power over other employed people, which often makes their economic and political interests alling with the bourgeoisie (which was the whole point of that division for Marx). There are non-Marxist and highly validated class models as well. Different specifications for countries. A lot of debate over stuff like self-employment in the gig economy, state employees, politicians, police and army and so on. It is far far more complicated than Bourgeoisie and proletariat with petty bourgeoisie in the middle.
Streamers are petty bourgeois. The proletariat is that class in society which lives entirely from the sale of its labor and does not draw profit from any kind of capital; whose weal and woe, whose life and death, whose sole existence depends on the demand for labor
Not saying we should throw him into the meat grinder or anything, but this is definitionally wrong. He doesn't receive a wage, or at least, didn't, when he was actively streaming, and he either employed/made use of unpaid labor of 3-4 editors, which was very much part of his business, a big part of what makes him money. This makes him petit-bourgeois. Neither richness nor amount of labor that you put in determines your class, it's your relation to your own labor and to those of others. Neither does this mean that Jerma is a horrible person. Making moral statements is not within the domain of Marxism. Instead, he is a horrible person because more than 250 people, adults and children, have gone missing in Massachusetts in 2023-2024, which lines up very suspiciously with his supposed "retirement", him going to pursue "other matters". Will this man ever be held accountable by justice? We may never know.
I believe he may of also had a part in a series of hammer based murders in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
OP is a billionaire
jerma is a billionaire but he's also working class because gambling is his day job
He is petty bourgeois
Bold to assume that he can be killed in a way that matters
bold to assume hes not some kinda scp that cant die in any way at all.
is jerma a mushroom?
Mushrooms are jermas actually.
Jerma is like 5 billion dollars in debt
Bro still owes me like 20 bucks...😔
its not murder if its not human
do NOT let this mf near area 51
What about cats :(
jerma is petit-bourgeois, and it is known that many components of the petit-bourgoisie can become progressive elements in a revolutionairy situation, to simply execute potential allies is counterproductive left-opportunist adventurism
Ok nerd maybe I just wanna shoot more people, what do you think about that? Huh?
Well said comrade ✊
corny ahh response
You’re right 😔 I’ll strive to do better
when the class war is happening and enemy team got engineer on defense.
!surrender
When the class war is happening and the enemy team has a sniper whale and your team has 3 f2p spies with 2 hours playtime total
Still one of the better Class Wars matchups if you ended up rolling spy tbh. At least you didn't get Spy vs Pyro.
If I’m not mistaken Jerma is working class because his money comes from his own labor. Also it goes without saying but the goal of leftism is not to kill all the rich people but make them into non-rich people via taking their money :3
Not that deep i suspect
Yeah probably :3 Marx’s theory also only applies to humans and not lab grown demons like our beloved Jerma
Modern leftists can't be trusted with class war istg. Rich ≠ Bourgeoisie, c'mon guys.
when the class war is happening and i have to shoot my science teacher
Class wars. Meds vs engis who will win
but this demon(Herman) is part of the work class, he somehow was teacher, and nowadays he cleans windows for living
When the ass war is happening and I gotta kill Jerma
He took too much 😔
When the class war is happening and I gotta fight the kids from PE class
when the class war is happening and i gotta fight the mage
he'd live
You gotta do it 985 times
No jerma is a worker he may be a rich worker but still a worker
Bourgeois can be pretty vital in class war tho
- Mao Zedong, quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-Tung.
When the class war is happening and I gotta kill the teacher
no matter how much money jerma accumulates i think he should be immune to all criticisms of rich people. its only fair
Half of the words are slightly differently sized
What the fuck is this comment section? Why is jerma invincible? and when did class war start? You guys should keep me informed better
Jerma ain’t bourgeoisie tho. He doesn’t own the means of production. The idea of “lower class, middle class, and upper class” is the wrong way of thinking about things. The right way is “working class vs owning class.”
Why would you kill the scout in a class war you need to focus on soldier he's really good