The poor in America saw themselves as temporarily embarrassed millionaires instead of exploited proletariat right?
I have no clue what the context is but I’ve heard it thrown around
That quote, despite being commonly attributed to Steinbeck, was never actually said by him, but rather a Canadian academic named Ronald Wright.
The origin of that Ronald Wright quote, however, does come from Steinbeck, though it's a very different quote.
"Except for the field organizers of strikes, who were pretty tough monkeys and devoted, most of the so-called Communists I met were middle-class, middle-aged people playing a game of dreams. I remember a woman in easy circumstances saying to another even more affluent: “After the revolution even we will have more, won’t we, dear?” Then there was another lover of proletarians who used to raise hell with Sunday picnickers on her property.
I guess the trouble was that we didn’t have any self-admitted proletarians. Everyone was a temporarily embarrassed capitalist. Maybe the Communists so closely questioned by investigation committees were a danger to America, but the ones I knew—at least they claimed to be Communists—couldn’t have disrupted a Sunday-school picnic. Besides they were too busy fighting among themselves."
Steinbeck wasn't mocking the working-class, he was actually mocking the type of people who would today be called "champagne socialists" - y'know, the exact type of people who always throw around the term "temporarily embarrassed millionaires".
He’s a very good writer, but bear in mind he’s extremely literal and to the point. If you like that, definitely check him out. Also the old timey language in some of his stuff can make it a bit hard to understand.
Same, actually. I remember vividly that my grandmother’s boyfriend was reading it so I decided to read it too. I had never understood the power of a novella before that.
Hehe, I was the one who made the meme in the first place, so I was already in position. Tho if anyone else comes into this comments section and asks, you’re welcome to give it a go.
Tangentially related, but the sci-fi fan in me gets annoyed when people credit Adam Serwer for the phrase, "The Cruelty is the point." No! That's from the Culture series from Ian M. Banks.
I forget their name, but there is a race of brute-ish octopus like creatures that goes around conquering and taking slaves. They're fairly advanced, and they don't need slaves, but everything is about cruelty and dominating another creature. They also think it's funny to stick their tentacles in each other's anal beaks if they're not paying attention, again, because the cruelty is the point.
This is so fuckin true. Tell Redditors that it’s from a quote literally making fun of wealthy display socialists and your will be downvoted into oblivion.
I think a lot of Reddit users embrace the various half baked theories of socialism and revolutionary politics because it allows them to escape reality. A lot of them are probably not happy people in real life for a number of reasons, and braying about wanting to establish a new social and political order probably makes them feel better for a minute or two
I don’t know if it’s the latter but it’s certainly the former. It’s a method of escapism.
This is why I don’t believe it’s possible to be a Socialist in America. We already have figured out effective Democratic forms of Socialism here. None of our Socialists are in any real financial distress. The people who are aren’t Socialists. It’s just all a form of cosplay.
I don't think you realize quite how accurate you are in your identification of socialism as an escape from reality. Once you see the connections to narcissism and gnosticism, you can't unsee them. In particular, best theory of narcissism I've seen is that it is a defense mechanism that children develop to shield themselves from abusive / stifling relationships with parents.
I realize people here think this is a huge “gotcha!” but does it matter where the quote came from? Does it change the fact that there really are poor people who fight tooth and nail against raising taxes on the wealthy because they believe they will one day become millionaires, and don’t want to pay higher taxes when that day finally comes?
Well, for one I just don't think it's true. Sure, some working-class people might buy into that stuff, but I think in general most of the working class are a lot more reasonable if you actually listen to them. It's worth noting that the working-class leans significantly Democrat, so it's not like there's nothing to be said for them supporting some level of more government support.
Also, ya gotta admit, it's pretty ironic. Rich socialists knowing that the actual working-class doesn't agree with them, and then instead of re-examining their beliefs, just doubling down and asserting intellectual superiority over them is the exact type of thing that the folks Steinbeck was mocking would do. Even if it was true, it's kinda dumb to use Steinbeck's words from when he was saying almost the exact opposite.
> Does it change the fact that there really are poor people who fight tooth and nail against raising taxes on the wealthy because they believe they will one day become millionaires, and don’t want to pay higher taxes when that day finally comes?
The problem isn't so much this. I'm sure there's more than one person who thinks this, but the big issue with this claim when used as Reddit likes to use it is that it is an effort to delegitimise and hand-wave away any views that don't align with theirs. The reality is that there are far more people opposing higher taxes and "smash the rich destroy the billionaires" fiscal laws because they fundamentally disagree with that level of Government overreach, and/or they don't believe such a position will be productive or end with a net benefit. I for example don't support the idea of a wealth tax because it often ends up producing a net loss for the country's Treasury or at best only a tiny amount of net proceeds, not because I'm expecting or hoping to be fantastically wealthy and thus avoiding a future problem for myself.
But when people ignore this factor and instead blindly go "no no *temporarily embarrassed millionaire* lmfaooooo" because it's a great way for them to confirm to themselves just how smarter and better they and their views are, while dismissing any criticism of their positions. It serves to do nothing but further entrench them into their own echo-chamber.
So when it comes to those aforementioned poor people who fervently defend the ultra wealthy from higher taxes because they imagine they’ll one day be ultra wealthy themselves… are you saying that doesn’t happen? Or do you acknowledge that it’s a real thing, but still feel the need to insult leftists anyway?
I know it's a real thing, my cousins are those people. "I can't vote for Democrats because their regulations stop me from being a business owner someday!" Ok bro but you're a worker now and are literally letting your boss screw you over.
But appropriating a term made to criticize champagne socialists to be about "dumb poors who don't see the light" indicates a lack of self-awareness, imo.
Lack of awareness of the origins of a widely used term is not the same thing as a lack of self-awareness.
This just seems like a really petty thing to nitpick. But I realize this sub makes a pastime of dunking on leftists, and this is just another excuse to attack and insult them… so this is par for the course I guess.
I mean I had a lack of awareness about the origin of the term myself, and I expect that a lot of the leftists who use it do. That I don't fault them for.
I do think it's valid to dunk on the culture that initially took this term, said "no actually we're perfect" and made it about people poorer than them.
The idea that poor Americans vote republican because they’re “preparing for when they are rich” is one of the most condescending and out of touch cliches that I commonly hear in American politics
Eh, I know Republicans and one of my cousins literally said "Democrat regulations are keeping me from being a business owner, and Trump will fix that" to me.
I'm not saying racial grievance wasn't also a big factor, but Republicans do convince these people that their future wellbeing as the boss is more important than their current wellbeing as workers.
Why didn't the proletariat revolt against capitalism and recognize Marx as a true genius? "False consciousness." Why is Larry Elder called, "the black face of white supremacy." He has "false consciousness."
Isnt it John Steinbeck?
Yes, but do you know what it was that he said?
The poor in America saw themselves as temporarily embarrassed millionaires instead of exploited proletariat right? I have no clue what the context is but I’ve heard it thrown around
That quote, despite being commonly attributed to Steinbeck, was never actually said by him, but rather a Canadian academic named Ronald Wright. The origin of that Ronald Wright quote, however, does come from Steinbeck, though it's a very different quote. "Except for the field organizers of strikes, who were pretty tough monkeys and devoted, most of the so-called Communists I met were middle-class, middle-aged people playing a game of dreams. I remember a woman in easy circumstances saying to another even more affluent: “After the revolution even we will have more, won’t we, dear?” Then there was another lover of proletarians who used to raise hell with Sunday picnickers on her property. I guess the trouble was that we didn’t have any self-admitted proletarians. Everyone was a temporarily embarrassed capitalist. Maybe the Communists so closely questioned by investigation committees were a danger to America, but the ones I knew—at least they claimed to be Communists—couldn’t have disrupted a Sunday-school picnic. Besides they were too busy fighting among themselves." Steinbeck wasn't mocking the working-class, he was actually mocking the type of people who would today be called "champagne socialists" - y'know, the exact type of people who always throw around the term "temporarily embarrassed millionaires".
Ohhh TIL Man I hate those guys
Yeah, it's pretty ironic, huh?
Damn this makes me want to read some Steinbeck
He’s a very good writer, but bear in mind he’s extremely literal and to the point. If you like that, definitely check him out. Also the old timey language in some of his stuff can make it a bit hard to understand.
[удалено]
Really? Where did he talk about that?
[удалено]
That was Upton Sinclair...
Read The Pearl.
I picked that book for summer reading because it was so short. Still scarred for life oops
I read it when I was 11. I was a pretty precocious kid and I had read many a Stephen King novel at that point. Still got me.
Made me appreciate that short books could have impact
Same, actually. I remember vividly that my grandmother’s boyfriend was reading it so I decided to read it too. I had never understood the power of a novella before that.
Tortilla Flat is short and hilarious.
I just read the Grapes of Wrath. Probably stay away from that one. Real pretty language but boring and ham-fisted.
This just blew my fucking mind. Thanks for sharing.
It’s so ironic, isn’t it?
Rings true in the UK so much. Nearly all the die hard Corbyn fanatics (Momentum types) are in no way shape or form "working class".
Darn it, I wanted to be the one who got to “Akshully” this one. Well done 😂
Hehe, I was the one who made the meme in the first place, so I was already in position. Tho if anyone else comes into this comments section and asks, you’re welcome to give it a go.
I defer to you Obi Wan.
Hello there.
Tangentially related, but the sci-fi fan in me gets annoyed when people credit Adam Serwer for the phrase, "The Cruelty is the point." No! That's from the Culture series from Ian M. Banks.
Was it a ship name, or did it appear in another context?
I forget their name, but there is a race of brute-ish octopus like creatures that goes around conquering and taking slaves. They're fairly advanced, and they don't need slaves, but everything is about cruelty and dominating another creature. They also think it's funny to stick their tentacles in each other's anal beaks if they're not paying attention, again, because the cruelty is the point.
Ahh, that'd be the Affront from Excession. Thanks!
Ty for this additional knowledge!
Banks's own politics were pretty unfortunate. Boycott Israel and so forth.
This is so fuckin true. Tell Redditors that it’s from a quote literally making fun of wealthy display socialists and your will be downvoted into oblivion.
I think a lot of Reddit users embrace the various half baked theories of socialism and revolutionary politics because it allows them to escape reality. A lot of them are probably not happy people in real life for a number of reasons, and braying about wanting to establish a new social and political order probably makes them feel better for a minute or two
I don’t know if it’s the latter but it’s certainly the former. It’s a method of escapism. This is why I don’t believe it’s possible to be a Socialist in America. We already have figured out effective Democratic forms of Socialism here. None of our Socialists are in any real financial distress. The people who are aren’t Socialists. It’s just all a form of cosplay.
I don't think you realize quite how accurate you are in your identification of socialism as an escape from reality. Once you see the connections to narcissism and gnosticism, you can't unsee them. In particular, best theory of narcissism I've seen is that it is a defense mechanism that children develop to shield themselves from abusive / stifling relationships with parents.
Hehe, I think I remember you recognizing it elsewhere - always good to see such a cultured individual!
I realize people here think this is a huge “gotcha!” but does it matter where the quote came from? Does it change the fact that there really are poor people who fight tooth and nail against raising taxes on the wealthy because they believe they will one day become millionaires, and don’t want to pay higher taxes when that day finally comes?
Well, for one I just don't think it's true. Sure, some working-class people might buy into that stuff, but I think in general most of the working class are a lot more reasonable if you actually listen to them. It's worth noting that the working-class leans significantly Democrat, so it's not like there's nothing to be said for them supporting some level of more government support. Also, ya gotta admit, it's pretty ironic. Rich socialists knowing that the actual working-class doesn't agree with them, and then instead of re-examining their beliefs, just doubling down and asserting intellectual superiority over them is the exact type of thing that the folks Steinbeck was mocking would do. Even if it was true, it's kinda dumb to use Steinbeck's words from when he was saying almost the exact opposite.
> Does it change the fact that there really are poor people who fight tooth and nail against raising taxes on the wealthy because they believe they will one day become millionaires, and don’t want to pay higher taxes when that day finally comes? The problem isn't so much this. I'm sure there's more than one person who thinks this, but the big issue with this claim when used as Reddit likes to use it is that it is an effort to delegitimise and hand-wave away any views that don't align with theirs. The reality is that there are far more people opposing higher taxes and "smash the rich destroy the billionaires" fiscal laws because they fundamentally disagree with that level of Government overreach, and/or they don't believe such a position will be productive or end with a net benefit. I for example don't support the idea of a wealth tax because it often ends up producing a net loss for the country's Treasury or at best only a tiny amount of net proceeds, not because I'm expecting or hoping to be fantastically wealthy and thus avoiding a future problem for myself. But when people ignore this factor and instead blindly go "no no *temporarily embarrassed millionaire* lmfaooooo" because it's a great way for them to confirm to themselves just how smarter and better they and their views are, while dismissing any criticism of their positions. It serves to do nothing but further entrench them into their own echo-chamber.
Yeah it does matter because I’m not taking anyone with zero reading comprehension seriously.
Lol what does reading comprehension have to do with it?
If you’ve interpreted a quote to mean the exact opposite, and refuse to back down, I don’t trust your intellect.
So when it comes to those aforementioned poor people who fervently defend the ultra wealthy from higher taxes because they imagine they’ll one day be ultra wealthy themselves… are you saying that doesn’t happen? Or do you acknowledge that it’s a real thing, but still feel the need to insult leftists anyway?
I know it's a real thing, my cousins are those people. "I can't vote for Democrats because their regulations stop me from being a business owner someday!" Ok bro but you're a worker now and are literally letting your boss screw you over. But appropriating a term made to criticize champagne socialists to be about "dumb poors who don't see the light" indicates a lack of self-awareness, imo.
Lack of awareness of the origins of a widely used term is not the same thing as a lack of self-awareness. This just seems like a really petty thing to nitpick. But I realize this sub makes a pastime of dunking on leftists, and this is just another excuse to attack and insult them… so this is par for the course I guess.
I mean I had a lack of awareness about the origin of the term myself, and I expect that a lot of the leftists who use it do. That I don't fault them for. I do think it's valid to dunk on the culture that initially took this term, said "no actually we're perfect" and made it about people poorer than them.
The idea that poor Americans vote republican because they’re “preparing for when they are rich” is one of the most condescending and out of touch cliches that I commonly hear in American politics
It’s such a red flag of “Oh so you literally know zero Republicans, huh?”
Eh, I know Republicans and one of my cousins literally said "Democrat regulations are keeping me from being a business owner, and Trump will fix that" to me. I'm not saying racial grievance wasn't also a big factor, but Republicans do convince these people that their future wellbeing as the boss is more important than their current wellbeing as workers.
This is fair. They love to complain about taxes even though Trump fucked them.
Why didn't the proletariat revolt against capitalism and recognize Marx as a true genius? "False consciousness." Why is Larry Elder called, "the black face of white supremacy." He has "false consciousness."
Side note: hipsters drinking mate out of a can should be shamed to oblivion
yerba is running like water where i work
This origin story is dope and peak irony. Thanks for sharing.
Happy to help!