Editor: The following is a post that was written by someone I know who wishes to remain anonymous. We will call him “Comrade M”. It seeks to ask questions regarding NEETS, incels, “forever alones” and the like. Can we consider them a new group of undesirables? What is their relationship to the class structure of the first world?
In the 1800’s, Karl Marx’s ideas were groundbreaking. Even more so than laying the foundations for scientific socialism, Karl Marx described the inner machinations of the capitalist system on both the sociological and economic level better than any previous economist, philosopher or social-scientist.
Even though Marx’s ideas were correct for his day, he lived in a rapidly changing global society. By the time of the Bolshevik revolution, the world had already changed in many ways. So Lenin and the Bolsheviks came along, and devised Marxism-Leninism. They “updated” Marxism, both to be current with the times, and also to encompass the collective experiences of the international communist movement since Marx and Engels passed away. At the time, the majority of the Communist movement belonged to a revisionist grouping called the “2nd international”, which upheld a generally revisionist, chauvinist line. The 2nd Internationale advocated for both social-imperialism and “evolutionary” socialism, or “social-democracy” which would become another stagnant neo-liberal trend in the modern day. At their worst, the 2nd international went as far as to defend the atrocity of Colonialism, eg, in the case of the old Workers Party of Belgium, which proposed the nationalization of land, resources, and people of the Congo for the benefit of the European Proletariat.
When the Maoists built their revolution in China, they understood that conditions had changed rapidly again. The gap in living standards between the imperialist countries and the colonies was massive, and the looting of the colonies enabled a massive transfer of wealth, which ultimately allowed the rise of the social-democrat states of the west. In essence, Imperialism allowed the bourgeoisie of the imperialist countries to buy off the working class for a time. The Maoists saw this phenomena, and for a period before Mao’s right-wing turn in the 1970’s, advocated the line that “In the final analysis, the whole cause of world revolution hinges on the revolutionary struggles of the Asian, African and Latin American peoples who make up the overwhelming majority of the world’s population”, to quote Vice Chairman Lin Biao. This policy of embourgifying, or buying off the western working class could only ever be a temporary measure, however.
Today, in the 21st century, the world has changed radically from the days of revolutionary China, economically, socially, culturally, technologically, on both the micro and macro level. We live in the era of liberal globalization, of Rainbow Empire, and of the increasing decline of the global capitalist system. The social democratic welfare states build by the bourgeoisie are being dismantled, and the first world is undergoing re-proletarianization, brought upon by a trinity of economic crisis, general social-cultural decline, and climate change. While the first world is still decades away from the possibility of real struggle being conducted, a distinct caste is rising in the first world, one which transcends class barriers. This caste exists outside of past terminology, as while there is a strong economic element to it, it is determined not strictly by economics, but also by the social sphere in a way that transcends traditional class analysis. These generally impoverished – many people within it live as modern-day vagabonds, travelling from city to city in their vans for temp work. Some are “NEETS”, middle and high school dropouts, generally physically or psychologically disabled, dependant either on poverty wage jobs, or welfare. Some are FOREVER ALONE or INCELS, – unattractive, physically disabled, or deformed people – generally, but not limited to men, incapable of forming romantic or sexual relations, or in many cases even friendships – most of them suffer from severe mental illness, depression, suicidal tendencies, etc. Large elements of indigenous communities, migrant/refugee labourers, the physically and mentally disabled/ill, drug addicts, and the homeless can be lumped into this makeshift “caste” of social undesirables. While many of these groups may have been classified by Marxist-Leninists and Maoists as a part of the Lumpenproletariat, this classification has limited scientific use in regards to understanding this umbrella caste.
The bonding factor between all of these groups is that they exist – both economically and socially, in precarious conditions. They have no real social base and are alienated from any kind of community, or social circles. They are generally miserable – depressed, angry. They are desperate for answers, disillusioned with Capitalism and Rainbow Empire, and are open to radicalization in a way that most people in the first world are not. They are, in a real sense, a part of the growing revolutionary subject within the west today.
Unfortunately, the Imperial so-called “communism” movement have disowned and denounced these people. They treat them as if they are barely human. Vicious, evil, when these are one of the few genuine pockets of people with real revolutionary potential in our pre-reproletarized west today, along with the lowest rungs of the working class, indigenous people, and migrant labourers. Lenin said we must go “Lower and deeper” among the masses to organize for revolution, and yet the social-imperial “left” continue to align with some of the most privileged demographics in the world, e.g., college Queer activists, quasi third position “lefty” racialists, and flavor of the day college IDPol activists – roots stemming overwhelmingly from the global bourgeoisie, or “Labor Aristocracy”. This caste have been forced into the arms of the reactionaries as a result of the failure of the western left – In forming analysis of material conditions in the western world, and also in failing to organize the scattered, albeit growing genuine pockets of revolutionary potential in the west.
While we are still decades off mass revolutionary potential in the Rainbow Empire (As in, the revolutionary subject comprising the majority of the population of the western capitalist states) measures can be made now to build the infrastructure to allow for more advanced revolutionary struggle – the Communist Party, its mass organs, and roots which will allow dual power institutions to be built in the future.
As such, I propose the following to revolutionaries in the west:
1) A distinction be made between the traditional Lumpen Proletariat, and the “undesirable” castes, eg, “NEETS”, “INCELS”, “FOREVER ALONE/FEMCEL”, Vagabond workers, the Homeless, Refugee/Migrant workers, drug addicts, and the physically/mentally ill and disabled – who form the new “undesirable” social caste in the west today.
2) That a genuine attempt be started at forming Marxist economic and social analysis regarding the “Undesirable” caste segments of society – Including learning from these communities,. Form synthesis between the conditions of divergent “undesirable” groups, particularly between female and male “undesirables” – Understand how these groups intersect, and the socio-economic mechanisms that have created this “undesirable” caste.
3) That we challenge the chauvinist line of the social imperial, revisionist/State controlled IDPOL/Liberal “socialists”, Sakaists, crypto-third positionists, etc, on the “undesirable” social caste.
4) That we develop concrete and realistic demands for the emancipation of the “undesirables”, both to be carried out in the immediate term (during the building of dual power institutions prior to the seizure state power) and post-seizure of state power, along with a creative strategy for organizing the “undesirable” caste into a red social base immediately.
I hope that if nothing else, this article serves to jumpstart genuine discussion and debate on the issue, which I hope to write on in more detail.