Marxist terminology for an individual who is a member of the industrial working class, a social phenomenon appearing during the transformation of societies through the industrial revolution of western Europe during the 19th century, Britain in particular.
Proletarians with minds and ideas of their own are people the middle class are afraid of. Even middle class leftists, who use social change movements to mobilise people to their own ends, who use empty slogans in order to attract frustrated workers.
The problem with this is that for proletarians to bring about change that will improve their lives, it has to be born from them. The leadership idea has to be overcome, as does the leadership itself existing in social change movements, who are mainly middle class people. The middle class in their various positions in society are antagonistic towards workers, and are integral to the control and pacification of workers through the various institutions they represent and control, even in areas of "social care". The relationships the middle class have with workers are bound up with rules of inequality, power and privilege, or rulers and ruled.
A workers movement for social change is not a genuine workers movement when the leadership are middle class. The power will not have gone away from the oppressors to the oppressed.
Karl Marx himself was middle class, and individuals within this class can help workers, and join them, but leadership, if it has to be used, must come from the workers and not the middle class, which does not occur with social change movements today.
To have exclusivity for one class is wrong people may suggest. But, in the main workers are exploited by a capitalist system, and middle class regulators- these watchmen, lackies of the system, have more power and postion in society, and this is of deteriment to workers, and relationships between them will carry negative qualities that couild ruin social change.
Proletarians with minds and ideas of their own are people the middle class are afraid of. Even middle class leftists, who use social change movements to mobilise people to their own ends, who use empty slogans in order to attract frustrated workers.
The problem with this is that for proletarians to bring about change that will improve their lives, it has to be born from them. The leadership idea has to be overcome, as does the leadership itself existing in social change movements, who are mainly middle class people. The middle class in their various positions in society are antagonistic towards workers, and are integral to the control and pacification of workers through the various institutions they represent and control, even in areas of "social care". The relationships the middle class have with workers are bound up with rules of inequality, power and privilege, or rulers and ruled.
A workers movement for social change is not a genuine workers movement when the leadership are middle class. The power will not have gone away from the oppressors to the oppressed.
Karl Marx himself was middle class, and individuals within this class can help workers, and join them, but leadership, if it has to be used, must come from the workers and not the middle class, which does not occur with social change movements today.
To have exclusivity for one class is wrong people may suggest. But, in the main workers are exploited by a capitalist system, and middle class regulators- these watchmen, lackies of the system, have more power and postion in society, and this is of deteriment to workers, and relationships between them will carry negative qualities that couild ruin social change.
by Jim Jammy December 31, 2004
Get the Proletarian mug.The working class. People who don't make things but rather sell their labor in the workplace, when the means of production are owned by someone else. The most widely known example is the factory worker. The international proletariat make up about 50% of the world population at this point. See wordbourgeoisword.
A shirt is worth $10. The boss has a factory to make shirts. Workers get paid $1 a shirt that they make, and the cotton costs $1 a shirt. So the boss spends $2 on every shirt. 10-2 is 8. The boss gets $8 a shirt, the worker gets only $1. Something's wrong here...
by Smackster October 5, 2003
Get the proletariat mug.Related Words
procetard
• Proletards
• pretard
• proletariat
• pretarded
• phonetard
• promptard
• protard
• Poketard
• proletariat syndrome
We have nothing to lose but our chains!
by Ralph Kerry March 14, 2005
Get the proletariat mug.Traffic was moving along great until I found myself behind this total phonetard doing ten miles per hour under the speed limit.
We were leaving the movie but were stuck behind this huge, fat phonetard who was oblivious to the fact he was blocking the hallway.
Also phonetardedly (adverb, as in, to drive phonetardedly)
We were leaving the movie but were stuck behind this huge, fat phonetard who was oblivious to the fact he was blocking the hallway.
Also phonetardedly (adverb, as in, to drive phonetardedly)
by geekboysteves January 24, 2010
Get the phonetard mug.My mom told me to quit going out with that proletariat girl.
Hey give me that copy of Gallery, it's the magazine for looking at proletariat chicks.
Hey give me that copy of Gallery, it's the magazine for looking at proletariat chicks.
by Joe Iron February 1, 2008
Get the proletariat mug.Protard is a combination of the words "professional" and "retard", and is generally used someone who is consistently stupid in their actions.
by Godspeed December 5, 2004
Get the protard mug.Another word for working class. Often used in a derogatory sense for people who sell their ability to work, rather than a finished or half-product. The means of production which they use are owned by someone else, they work for a set wage rather than a profit. Proletariat (litt. 'those who only have their children') is usually associated with factory workers. Working under dismal circumstances. But in many non-industrialised countries, those working in a factory and referred to as 'proletariat' regard this work as a huge step up from working on the farm, which in turn is a huge improvement over subsistence farming.
This example deals with the Eurorean Union, in particular the Euro area. Some character sets do not display the euro symbol corretly. You will see '€' in its stead.
A shirt is sold for €12. The sales tax is between €2 and €3 depending on the country, the shopkeeper doubles or even triples his/her purchase price to arrive at the sales price. He tells us that this is to cover his costs, which include his director's salary and perks. At best, €5 is available for the earlier steps in the production chain, at worst €3.
The middle man tries for as high a margin as he can get.
Workers - deemed 'the proletariat' - are paid €0.50 per shirt made, the cotton costs another €0.50 a shirt. The garment boss spends €1 on shipping, €0.50 on protecting his business (includes bribes where needed), and €0.25 on premises and admin. The boss makes €0.25 a shirt, double that if he is 'well-connected'.
Ironically, the shop with the higher margin must buy lower priced goods to compete on price with more efficient shops. These are likely goods which the middle man must have found harder to sell at a higher price.
Something may well be wrong here, but please, don't ask me to point out what ... the workers are free to remain farm hands, or subsistence farmers, yet choose the factory, thus keeping the cost of labour low; planned systems where appointees decide how many shirts people want and what these will look like do not seem to have been all that successful?
A shirt is sold for €12. The sales tax is between €2 and €3 depending on the country, the shopkeeper doubles or even triples his/her purchase price to arrive at the sales price. He tells us that this is to cover his costs, which include his director's salary and perks. At best, €5 is available for the earlier steps in the production chain, at worst €3.
The middle man tries for as high a margin as he can get.
Workers - deemed 'the proletariat' - are paid €0.50 per shirt made, the cotton costs another €0.50 a shirt. The garment boss spends €1 on shipping, €0.50 on protecting his business (includes bribes where needed), and €0.25 on premises and admin. The boss makes €0.25 a shirt, double that if he is 'well-connected'.
Ironically, the shop with the higher margin must buy lower priced goods to compete on price with more efficient shops. These are likely goods which the middle man must have found harder to sell at a higher price.
Something may well be wrong here, but please, don't ask me to point out what ... the workers are free to remain farm hands, or subsistence farmers, yet choose the factory, thus keeping the cost of labour low; planned systems where appointees decide how many shirts people want and what these will look like do not seem to have been all that successful?
by Economic Liberal July 20, 2008
Get the proletariat mug.