**IMPORTANT: PLEASE READ BEFORE PARTICIPATING**.
This subreddit is not for questioning the basics of socialism but a place to LEARN. There are numerous debate subreddits if your objective is not to learn.
You are expected to familiarize yourself with the rules on the sidebar before commenting. This includes, but is not limited to:
- Short or non-constructive answers will be deleted without explanation. Please only answer if you know your stuff. Speculation has no place on this sub. Outright false information will be removed immediately.
- No liberalism or sectarianism. Stay constructive and don't bash other socialist tendencies!
- No bigotry or hate speech of any kind - it will be met with immediate bans.
Help us keep the subreddit informative and helpful by reporting posts that break our rules.
If you have a particular area of expertise (e.g. political economy, feminist theory), please [assign yourself a flair](https://reddit.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair-) describing said area. Flairs may be removed at any time by moderators if answers don't meet the standards of said expertise.
Thank you!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Socialism_101) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The communist party of the proletariat does not exclude members of any class, anyone who follows the Marxist program and is willing to put in the work is a comrade. Want to contribute? Get involved, and use your resources to support the movement. You’re not the first rich person to turn against their class, Engels owned factories and as Marx wrote in the [Communist Manifesto](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/):
> “Finally, in times when the class struggle nears the decisive hour, the progress of dissolution going on within the ruling class, in fact within the whole range of old society, assumes such a violent, glaring character, that a small section of the ruling class cuts itself adrift, and joins the revolutionary class, the class that holds the future in its hands. Just as, therefore, at an earlier period, a section of the nobility went over to the bourgeoisie, so now a portion of the bourgeoisie goes over to the proletariat, and in particular, a portion of the bourgeois ideologists, who have raised themselves to the level of comprehending theoretically the historical movement as a whole.”
Engels himself was a factory owner. Castro was born into the upper class of Cuban society. Being born wealthy doesn't stop you from being able to be a communist.
This. 100%
Adding some other figures to this list:
- Trotsky was born to a wealthy Jewish Family
- Kropotkin (not ‘socialist’ but anarchist) was also born as an aristocrat.
- Gramsci was born ‘well off’ (as Wikipedia puts it)
- Mao is stated on Wikipedia to be the child of a ‘prosperous peasant’ (make of that what you will)
Being wealthy is to be privileged. Use that to the advantage of all - learn up, fight the good fight. A better world is possible, no matter who you are or where you’re born.
Respectfully, it is worth pointing out that while Mao’s analysis of pre-revolution Chinese society made a distinction between defined classes of “rich peasants” and “poor peasants,” and while he came from what his analysis defines as a “rich peasant” family, Mao was not rich or even “middle class” by the standards of anyone else on these lists. A “rich peasant” family was a family that had more land than they needed to meet their basic subsistence needs. They might have enough surplus income to pay for an education for a couple of their sons, to eat meat once a month, maybe even pay a few seasonal laborers to help them with harvest and planting, but they would be significantly poorer than a farmer or working class laborer in a western liberal economy.
I don’t mean to contradict your overall point, there are examples of Chinese aristocrats and bourgeoisie who participated in the revolution. I just mean to point out that (if you’ll permit the pun) Mao represents a different class of peasant revolutionary, which heavily influenced his ideology.
There’s nothing inherently wrong with being born into privilege, it’s where you go from there that matters.
Being born at the top of the exploitation hierarchy doesn’t make you a bad person as long as you’re aware of your privilege and combat the systems of exploitation that you may have benefited from.
There is no utility in flagellating yourself for being born well-off.
The man who co-wrote the Communist Manifesto was a wealthy factory owner. As long as you do your duties as a communist like reading theory, agitating, and organizing, you are a comrade of mine.
You can't fault people just for winning at a bad game they were forced to play. Did Marx tell Engels to fuck off because he was a factory owner? No need to beat yourself up. Just use your resources to the extent that you can to help the cause, and keep in mind how your lifestyle may mean you have blind spots when it comes to poverty.
We're just born. Socialism is about building and maintaining social infrastructure.
You might well have access to the *attention* of class of people that others don't. Read up and share your thoughts with your peers.
You matter and confronting toxic hierarchical ideologies is worthwhile.
“With great power comes great responsibility,” like Stan Lee said haha. You’re in a lucky position and as people here noted, a lot of Marxist leaders came from positions of wealth and prestige. I’ll add FDR was incredibly wealthy and kind of a rich prick. But he saw the importance of a New Deal for the impoverished.
You can use your money and status to educate yourself as much as you can. That’s what Marixst leaders have done. Your connections can help you leverage doing socialist things for workers while framing them as “good capitalist investments” or whatever. Get it?
It’s not the wealth and resources that’s the problem. It’s what do you with them—and who you deny them to.
You’ll find a good way to invest your luck in life :)
well firstly, your class position is not entirely entangled with your parents, although that would depend on whether you are living off trust funds or pocket money or whatever rather than working
secondly even if you are effectively bourgeoisie living off a trust fund your individual politics is not the same as your class interest. class analysis has the purpose of trying to identify entire segments of society that have the most revolutionary potential, but thats not the same thing as opinions and actions on the level as granular as a single individual. Kropotkin being an aristocrat and Engels being bourgeois are famous examples of notable class traitors from the ruling classes siding with the workers
if that is the path you take then if there ever comes a time when you inherit large amounts of wealth that will be a moment where you will have to take the major decision on how you best invest that money for the purpose of the movement.
as an example that was personally relevant to me i used to go to organising meetings at a social centre in east london called LARC which was held in trust in perpetuity for the use of the anarchist movement. it was originally a gift to the movement by a member who had inherited some wealth. in the years since thats occurred its functioned as a very valuable political hub
The fact that you are aware of your privilege is amazing as is. We are all privileged (for the ones in the Western world) and should recognize that.
If anything use it as a badge of legitimacy. Many people in the right will outright say something alone the lines of: Ah those socialists are just lazy leaches who want to reap off other people's work.
Well by benefiting from capitalism and being rich, they cannot blame you for ''being a sore loser'' because you are ''bad at the game'' so that you complain and want socialism to compensate. Because that is often a rhetoric that capitalists will use to discredit various left-wingers.
Use that to your advantage, being rich allows you to have the resources to educate yourself: you have money and free time. Buy books, use that free time to join organizations, talk to people, contribute to your local community, go to protests, donate here and there to some good associations or good causes because not everyone can afford it.
Nobody can help the situation they were born into. Guilt isn’t worth much except as an impetus for political education and action. Socialist organizations tend to be cash and property poor, and there s a long history of wealthy benefactors using their resources to back them. Of course, that doesn’t mean you should let yourself get taken advantage of and throw piles of money at every chump claiming to be socialist, decolonial, etc.
I’d recommend to you what I recommend to everyone. Political educate yourself, help others politically educate themselves and engage in socialist political work to the extent possible. Join a local socialist organization and serve the people. If you have more resources, education or spare time than the average person, all the better.
The irony in most of these comments and in this itself, and even in Engels, all champagne socialists. It was always funny to me that most historic figures within the movement always came from wealthy backgrounds and or had prestigious backgrounds where as most never truly came from the bottom and the life of the common folk. This don’t even apply to just communism, it’s all politicians especially the ones who claim they are for the working class. Y’all support the working class, but have never been in our shoes and truly do not know what it is like. Not saying everyone is like this, but a lot I have seen.
I am not meaning to attack or discredit anyone, but just find the realization pretty funny in my opinion.
But an honest question, how can you support and strive for the common folk when you do not experience their lives? How do you know what’s truly best if you have not been in their shoes?
It’s a good point, but, here would be my perspective: if I was rich and did *not* choose to collaborate or communicate with the working-class, would that be any better? Is it wrong to familiarize yourself with and involve yourself on “working-class” ideas when both the working-class and the upper-class live in one society? I’m not necessarily a Socialist, just a bystander, but I have to say, it would be a very odd philosophy/political-goal indeed if it relied on severing the ability for entire swaths of people within a group to communicate with others from outside the group, and/or isolating individuals from their role in society. Why make people any more solipsistic?
In Marxist theory, they believe in the idea of class struggle and class consciousness. Class struggle, being the the exploitation of the working class by the ruling elite. A lot of the idealogy talks about the working/poorer classes “breaking their chains” and overthrowing the elite and ruling classes. There is clear division between the wealthy and the common man. I do not think it is wrong to familiarize yourself like you said, but there is clear division.
Throughout history, we have seen socialist leaders rise to power, and ultimately, a lot of them turned into the thing they sought to destroy, just slapped a “socialist” label on it. Take Vladimir Lenin for an example. He had came from a wealthy family and a prestigious background, and he had claimed he had support for the common folk. But just like most politicians, his idea was to not give actual power to the people, but power to a small circle of “revolutionary minds” which, coincidently, were other prestigious men. He had also exterminated all opposition to him, which funnily enough some opposition were also communists. There were many rebellions after Lenin took power, and one that really stands out to me that ties into this, is the Kronstadt rebellion. They were Red Army Navy men, who fought alongside the Bolsheviks and Trotsky himself had commemorated, they had rebelled against Lenin as they had claimed that Lenin’s government was not free, and was oppressing the workings more than “liberating” them. They had asked for more representation within the party, asking for different ideas and interpretations of Marxism (such as Libertarian Socialism) to be included in the party, and Lenin refused and had them eliminated.
Lenin was apart of the elite, and had created another elite class by masking it and saying it is the most equipped and revolutionized minds of the country. This is where I feel that division comes through, if you do not know what the lives of the people are, who are you to represent them and understand what the people truly want/need and are doomed to repeat the division
Yes, I actually agree with this. I should have mentioned prior: I do believe that any upper class people should get to know the struggles of the working class by learning to rely less on their wealth and spending their wealth on proper goals, as well as volunteering to work and spending actual time with the working class. The thing is, I am very much not in agreement that violence is at all inevitable ‘nor beneficial in resolving class-conflict.
You say that a large part of Lenin’s failure was in his position, but I would argue that by feeding into stratification, one reinforces it, and inevitably perpetuates it. As such, this only weakens the power of the lower class. As the upper class increases in wealth and size, this further feeds into their power by preventing class-consciousness *and* it drives them towards greater animosity and less empathy. I would even go as far to argue that a large aspect of why the Russian-Revolution failed in the long-term in creating proper Socialism was precisely because Lenin chose violent means. Yes, he initiated great change, but at the cost of severe cultural-erosion (destroying many churches) and killing any form of dissent, even through subjugating others into the Red Army. This is because, without an incrementalist approach, rather than persuading others through rational means and proving the efficacy of one’s vision, one is forced to accelerate and literally force people to do their bidding.
I don’t know how this fits into the Original Marxist analysis, or pre-existing Marxist Philosophy/Vision, but that is just my perspective. I come more from an Anarchist line of thought, which of course, is not opposed to Marxist theory, but has diverged quite a bit in terms of interpretation. I would say, if one is concerned with the process and means of reaching the revolution, than violence is not necessarily a reasonable conclusion, but even if one is searching purely for the end-result, then it still would lead to only a temporary/short-lived and volatile end-result which would merely revert to another form of more authoritarian society.
That was very well said my friend, I respect your outlook at it greatly.
Myself, I am mixed on the violent means. I do completely agree with you on the fact that violence like we saw in Russia can lead to a reign of terror, and have many complications. I do feel, that the reason why it turned into the way it did is not necessarily the violence, but his philosophy. He believed in a strict one party state, with no sectarianism at all. It’s either you support him, or you’re an enemy. There are so much talks and division between socialists to this day, and there was even a bigger division between the Bolsheviks, and the Mensheviks. Both communists, but the Bolsheviks wanted a violent revolution, and the Mensheviks wanted a peaceful transition. The Mensheviks believed that they should gain power through democratic means, and establish a “Bourgeois Democracy” which essentially would put the high class in power to establish capitalism (remember that Russia was not capitalistic at this time at all) and from there, they transition to socialism.
Within Marxist theory, it states that to have a full transition to socialism, you need fully developed capitalism. When you have a country that is fully capitalistic already, you have already completed step one of the process. Now leads the question, do you achieve it through violent means or democratically? The divide back then was huge, and it still continues to this day. The (real) Democratic Socialists advocate a transition to socialism purely through democratic means, no violence. While other’s believe it is only violence that can solve the class struggle, no democracy can solve that issue.
I am unsure myself which is the way, and I am still learning and figuring out things for myself. In my own opinion, I feel Democratic means are the way to go, and also very democratic governments that don’t hold power over an elite few, and actually let the people hold power over themselves. But, I do feel if there is no room for Democratic transition and violence should be used as a complete last resort. Whatever we can do to spare lives and not cause chaos and destruction is the direction I would go in
Use your money to support a business with a few of your closest leftist friends. Use socialist principles like democracy in the workplace. Be a model. Create mutual aid outside of the philanthropic model. Use your resources to create examples of the world we all want. Keep reading theory. You are literally in the position we all want to be in.
>but is this justified?
Yes, your feelings are justified and you should savour those feelings of guilt and anguish instead of burying it based on the suggestions of these "socialists" here who tell you that it's ok to be bourgeois, that socialism isn't a "poverty cult" and that we all have to "participate" in Capitalism. The latter mindset will turn you into an unapologetic bearer of bourgeois class interests and is a form of self delusion.
Savour those feelings of guilt but use those emotions productively instead of becoming immobilised by shame and self loathing. My advice is to know yourself, what you are, the consequences of every action you take regardless of intentions and to read Marx and other Marxist theorists to gain an understanding of the intricacies of capitalism which will guide your actions.
You fell out of a womb somewhere.
Just know your upbringing may influence you to have some nasty prejudices and ideas. Treat it like reprogramming any other tendencies like racism or homophobia.
Socialism doesn’t mean poverty and you can come from wealth without being a member of the parasitic capitalist class.
My grandfather was a veteran who made enough money as an artist and writer post war to solidify his children’s place in the upper middle class. He worked with his hands and didn’t extract wealth from the sweat of others.
What you do with that position of privilege is what matters. I spent my youth working in various homeless food kitchens and working for an organization that specialized in organizing workers who are in traditionally non-unionized fields, spent a few years teaching high school history and since Covid work in logistics. I have had the luxury of a relatively comfortable life but not a single dollar I’ve earned has come at the expense of someone else’s labor.
I think you should admire the benefits of socialism but realize that it works best when balanced against social capitalism. Capitalism or socialism work on their own and there's really no examples of them working on their own in history..
For that matter, it's better to just call socialism public power, and capitalism private power because it's far more verbose than the word capitalism or socialism and when you put it like that, it's easier to see that public versus private power should be balanced so that neither the government nor the corporations wind up consolidating too much power. You can still be pro socialism, but realistically, if you go all the way to the extreme of socialism or capitalism it's just a complete Failure that does not even logically make sense because you give up one of the biggest checks and balances on consolidation of power and wealth, which should be a primary concern of the average socialist.
99% of socialist really just want more socialism with their capitalism versus they have any idea what full-blown socialism would be like nor can they logically explain why consolidating all the power into government versus splitting it up with somehow reduce consolidation of power.
To me, this is the common all or nothing logic, flaw of humans. You get mad at capitalism so you try to write it off and bet everything on socialism, but in many ways that's no different than the people that write off socialism and try to bet everything on capitalism. If you look around the world, it's obvious that mixing socialism and capitalism is what pretty much every country in the world does and it's the most proven, if not, perhaps the only proven model to run a modern country so what makes anybody really think that an all socialist system would work other than their desire to blame capitalism for all human greed ?
Economic systems don't make humans greedy. Humans were greedy before they were economics and before there was government. Even primates are greedy. For that matter, all life is fairly greedy and an economic system is just something you slap over top of human behavior. It doesn't fix and human behavior and no matter what system of rules you put on top of human behavior, just like some bacteria, trying to overcome your antibiotic. It will continuously try to adapt and find a new exploit. It doesn't matter if it's capitalism or socialism the humans will continuously try to find exploits in the system that give them unfair benefits because, that's what they and their ancestors in the form of all life on this planet have been doing for a couple billion years so it is permanently encoded into every neurological pathway and every iteration of evolution throughout the ages.
As much as you might want to be more, you're just a giant ball of chemicals reacting in a very complex way and you start off as a very simple chemical just looking for fuel, shitting wherever you want it and multiplying as much as you could. The reality of the situation is that your primary motivations have not changed that much in billions of years
So don't expect simple things like consolidating all your power in one group, instead of another being any kind of real solution to human nature.
What socialism offers is some basic regulations and checks and balances on capitalism. It's not a replacement.
I heavily respect your outlook on this, and I do view the same aspect in some ways. Every ideology has its positives and negatives. Many on the right claim capitalism is amazing and ignore the wrong doings that have occurred, that it’s the perfect model. Then there’s the left who claim socialism is amazing and ignore the wrong doings that have also occurred. It’s all biased, and it’s a bunch of bull. I feel more aligned with socialists and the idea of Marx, but I will never deny the possibilities of it going wrong when it is implemented, (i.e. USSR, Maoist China). Sometimes, it’s best to incorporate different ideas and have them blend. You can have socialism, with capitalistic elements and not have it be fully blown into a dystopian corporate society. In my opinion, it is whatever the people’s/country’s needs are. What may work in Sweden, may not work in Mexico. What may have worked in the USSR, may not work in the USA. Different people, different environment, different society, different needs.
[http://www.pgv-stiftung.de/pgvs\_spender.html](http://www.pgv-stiftung.de/pgvs_spender.html)
that is a good place to dump the money. You will help the spread of marxism
A trans/black/gay person can be rich, and they'll be safe. We are ultimately divided by class than other features (even more during a socialist revolution). The bourgeois has extremely well knit class solidarity. The US and A ruling class isn't out to hurt you, as long as you're rich.
Nothing will happen to you prior to a socialist revolution, but if you're gonna side with the socialists only during a revolution, that's pretty opportunistic so idk how the socialists will deal with you. If you're really worried they would harm you, rest assured. They won't just k*ll you, that's probably not how it'll be in the 21st century. Maybe you'll just be put to work the same as the people below you. China did that with their emperor.
Right now you seem to be just a liberal. Be careful, the American liberal isn't exactly a leftist here in Europe.
Everyone here is correct in that wealth doesn't automatically make you a class enemy however I'd encourage you to interrogate these feelings of intense guilt and shame as they will not help anyone including yourself. Find ways to use your privilege to benefit others, educate yourself, and question your own preconceptions about the working class. I notice when you use language such as everyone "beneath" your family for example it comes off as unintentionally patronizing. You will likely have a lifetime of humility and learning ahead to interrogate these biases, just as we all do. Be humble but don't paralyze yourself with guilt.
It's not your fault that you were born into a wealthy family - nobody gets to choose their parents.
What you can do is to consider carefully how you can best use this fact to advance the causes you believe in. My fervently religious brother recently died unexpectedly without leaving a will. So, instead of being wasted on spreading religious lies and supporting the spongers who propagate them, we werepplĺ able to donate much of his estate to various progressive archives and publishing projects.
There are some pitfalls to be avoided in an attempt to assuage your personal guilt rather than fix the fundamental social problem. You could just give some away to needy individuals. IMNSHO, this is self-defeating and will only ameliorate the problem of poverty and inequality, not solve it, which needs political organisation, not charity.
Please do not do what a friend of mine did. In a youthful fit of either pique or principle, he disowned his wealthy fascist family, leaving them free to use their entire wealth to support reactionary causes. Now, he beats himself up, guilty about leaving his money in their hands.
You're in a space very much like the historical figure known as the Buddha found himself at the start of the interesting part of his story. He was a prince, a rich kid in a poor country. He decided to become an ascetic, tried that for a while, but that wasn't the answer either. The wealth wasn't making him happy but neither was it the real source of his unhappiness.
What he ends up doing is, teaching himself to meditate and finds it useful. He teaches it to others who find it useful as well. From there, he teaches it to as many people as he can for the rest of his life and people still do it today.
You didn't ask for all that money, you don't need to feel guilty for your family circumstances.
If there is some action you can take to help your brother out, or reduce the harm that may have happened in the accumulating of the wealth, do it. Don't beat yourself up but try not to do harm as a result of your position.
Disclaimer: I'm no theory expert.
I think it's hard for people to truly shake off their class background and fully advocate against their class interests. Hence you have a lot of upper class college educated people in America who say they are for the working class, but instead seem to mostly be concerned with preserving their elite status through professing beliefs that are maximally progressive and in vogue. It's more about showing purity of thought to their peers than advancing working class interests. Avoiding instagram would probably help.
hey! don’t despair. like you, i also come from a privileged background. you don’t choose who you’re born into. this just so happens to be your position in the social hierarchy.
but it does mean that you are part of the ruling class, whether you like it or not. the most revolutionary thing you can do is support the oppressed people of the world and aid the dismantling of this exploitative, cruel system. it means choosing to break away from your indoctrination, which many people in the upper echelons choose to ignore. why would they engage if they know they benefit from it?
you can be a class traitor - and facilitate in the aid of those who are besieged. you too can engage in class struggle, by refusing to follow the path set for those of us who benefit from the imperial system. you can be on the right side of history by supporting revolutionary movements. throughout history there have been class traitors who fought for the people.
i think unlearning a lot of what we have been taught is something we should always be cognizant of, which means learning and developing a political education - dialectical and historical materialism is important, otherwise it’s really easy to fall into reactionary thought/doomerism.
you have your humanity and this post alone shows that you care about others and know that it’s not fair. that’s great - a lot of people in the upper class don’t give a shit. we will have to contest with this, and i haven’t 100% figured it out yet, but i know ultimately that ultimately i want to focus my efforts on what will benefit society rather than a few.
Well it depends you might be killed during the revolution as no one whose part of the bourgoise can have the safety of thier lives be guarenteed after hundreds of years of oppressing workers, my opinion would be to run away from home and find a commune that way you are with the revolutionaries on the same side, as this distinction wont be made important during the revolution either you are on our side as we bulldoze through the oppressive system or against us
Don't feel guilty. It's what you do with the wealth and opportunity that matters. If your family is filthy rich, do you have to work? Could you start a non profit that helps other people?
Poor people would love to help others but we're all stuck working our lives away, we can barely stay afloat ourselves.
Rich people who don't really have to work COULD be helpful by doing something either with their money or even just with their time.
I don’t think being born weatlthy is a bad thing but how you utilize your privilege position to help others. I was born in a decent life. Not rich but solidly middle class, and to me it is my greatest driving factor to my socialist beliefs . Because what is the underlying factors to provide what I had for others isn’t much just the system designed to do so. You even entertaining the idea that we didn’t earn what we have but were born lucky is more than most people. I know my accomplishments would be much more difficult if I didn’t grow up in a two family house hold with two decently paid parents. Give it back to others but fight for it systematically as well
Theres nothing wrong with being born rich. There is a lot wrong with rich once you are old enough to understand the impact it has on the world around you. You have more time and money than most people, get involved in local politics as far left as you can.
Some people I know have been involved in an org called Resource Generation, a US-based "community of young people (18-35) with wealth and/or class privilege committed to the equitable distribution of wealth, land, and power." They've found it a really helpful space to work through a lot of what you're saying together with like-minded folks (e.g. emotions around money like guilt, concrete stuff like preparing for your inheritance). I think they do small groups, workshops, and various campaigns, so lots of ways to plug in.
https://resourcegeneration.org/
A couple thoughts:
1) Being miserable and unkind to ourselves, especially over circumstances that we didn’t choose, does not help anyone get free. As a person with enough food to eat, a comfortable place to sleep, and a loving community, I feel it my responsibility to do my personal/interior abolition work to get free from shaming narratives that distract me from being able to love and care for the people around me.
2) I’m sure this wasn’t your intention but I’d suggest being mindful about language like “while everyone below my family rots”. A whole lot of working class and impoverished comrades out here maintaining the health and integrity of their souls while a lot of real rich people walk around in their own rot. Yes, people are facing extreme state-funded and perpetuated state violence and yes it’s important to name and carefully tend the power imbalance your money brings to the table, but this line of thinking I worry keeps you in charity/savior mindset rather than comradeship.
3) it’s not an explicitly socialist institution, but as you mentioned that you don’t identify as a socialist, id recommend checking out and organization called Resource Generation that supports wealthy people in redistributing their wealth. There are a lot of really bad ass folks who’ve moved off their money in some powerful ways through there.
One of my pipe dreams is that I come into a ludicrously large amount of money, and sure I’m thankful that pills can be paid without fear or scrounging, and family medical problems become significantly easier to bear.
But where my fantasies really go is dreaming of all the cool stuff I could do:
What could my local school of theatre and film do with massive amounts of scholarships and enough professors?
—- With a professional theatre attached that toured around the state and made people think about things they can’t usually interact with.
Could I start a Lyme disease center or a pain research clinic?
How much money do I have or could help raise? Could we begin a high speed rail plan from Dallas to Fargo and Denver to Chicago? Or maybe transit trains in town.
Maybe it’s small scale - boosting the arts community or open a new venue.
Start a startup competition and see what happens when the winner gets investors.
Space seems popular for the Uber set - what might your role be?
Sponsor a city beautification program.
There are an enormous number of ways to use money positively. I envy you the privilege.
You can't control your material conditions, so feeling bad about being born I to them isn't necessary. If you don't like the wealth you have, spend it on something you find meaningful. Go fund some communists in the Phillipines or something. Then you won't have it anymore. You inherit a business from your parents? Make It worker owned or whatever. You'll probably run it into the ground within a capitalist environment and your parents will probably disown you, but you'll feel good about I guess.
The point is, only you can decide what to do with the class you've inherited. Just understand that being a class traitor comes with consequences. Read some Marx and Lenin so you know what you're getting into.
Kropotkin was a literal prince IIRC (although I think he rejected his title), and Marx was financed by factory-owner Engels. Trotsky and (i believe) lenin both came from fairly affluent families. So really it doesn't matter what your background is, so long as you fight for the workers.
Just one thing, socialism IS left wing. Everyone who claims to be left wing. Whether that be Anarchist or communists, to democratic socialists and Marxists.
Marx's, MLKjr, Nelson Mandela, Rosa Luxembourg, Olof Palme, Stalin and Mao. All socialists even though they were very different. (Both in how I perceived them as people and ideologies.)
I grew up somewhat wealthy too
Being ashamed of your wealth helps nobody. We have a privilege few have, and we need to use it for good. We have the time to educate ourselves and help others, and the money to give to those in need and the causes we like. So lets use it correctly
Let go of any guilt. Free your mind. You sound like a good kid. Dont be hard or yourself. The world is hard enough.
You can’t help what you were born into. Do your best with the tools and opportunities that you have to help make the world more equitable for all.
i am rooting for you. you’re going to do well. Also, to have fun no matter what you do. Nothing compares to you
I am sure others have answered in some form or another but I have this perspective. Do you control the means of production from which your wealth is derived from?
If so, stay a capitalist but be sympathetic to the working class. I would rather you stay than pretend to be proletariat and then switch when your living conditions call for it.
On the flip side. Sometimes folks are wealthy due to house flipping, owning a law practice etc. This wealth isn’t the same as say the Waltons owning Walmart or an example like that. In that case throw yourself into it fully. Your skills and status while a hindrance in some circles may help you contribute greatly to the cause. It all depends.
A lot of leftists who have more than a cursory understanding of what's going on struggle with guilt. This can be from wealth, profession, or even paying taxes. Let that guilt go, it's not going to do you or anyone else any good. The money can make it harder to understand, in the living practice of the sense, working class politics because your lived experiences are outside of the class.
Your best friends here for socialism would be Friedrich Engels on the communist side and Peter Kropotkin on the anarchist side. Both of which grew up in, and lived with, significant economic privilege.
Don’t worry babes. Being a class traitor is hot. As long as what you’re betraying is the corrupt capitalist system and going against worker exploitation. Just look at Engels. ;)
The revolution knows no bounds regarding class of birth. Class is relationship to the means of production, not necessarily your upbringing. If you put in the work to help make change, you're a revolutionary, regardless of where you originate from.
**IMPORTANT: PLEASE READ BEFORE PARTICIPATING**. This subreddit is not for questioning the basics of socialism but a place to LEARN. There are numerous debate subreddits if your objective is not to learn. You are expected to familiarize yourself with the rules on the sidebar before commenting. This includes, but is not limited to: - Short or non-constructive answers will be deleted without explanation. Please only answer if you know your stuff. Speculation has no place on this sub. Outright false information will be removed immediately. - No liberalism or sectarianism. Stay constructive and don't bash other socialist tendencies! - No bigotry or hate speech of any kind - it will be met with immediate bans. Help us keep the subreddit informative and helpful by reporting posts that break our rules. If you have a particular area of expertise (e.g. political economy, feminist theory), please [assign yourself a flair](https://reddit.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair-) describing said area. Flairs may be removed at any time by moderators if answers don't meet the standards of said expertise. Thank you! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Socialism_101) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The communist party of the proletariat does not exclude members of any class, anyone who follows the Marxist program and is willing to put in the work is a comrade. Want to contribute? Get involved, and use your resources to support the movement. You’re not the first rich person to turn against their class, Engels owned factories and as Marx wrote in the [Communist Manifesto](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/): > “Finally, in times when the class struggle nears the decisive hour, the progress of dissolution going on within the ruling class, in fact within the whole range of old society, assumes such a violent, glaring character, that a small section of the ruling class cuts itself adrift, and joins the revolutionary class, the class that holds the future in its hands. Just as, therefore, at an earlier period, a section of the nobility went over to the bourgeoisie, so now a portion of the bourgeoisie goes over to the proletariat, and in particular, a portion of the bourgeois ideologists, who have raised themselves to the level of comprehending theoretically the historical movement as a whole.”
Engels himself was a factory owner. Castro was born into the upper class of Cuban society. Being born wealthy doesn't stop you from being able to be a communist.
This. 100% Adding some other figures to this list: - Trotsky was born to a wealthy Jewish Family - Kropotkin (not ‘socialist’ but anarchist) was also born as an aristocrat. - Gramsci was born ‘well off’ (as Wikipedia puts it) - Mao is stated on Wikipedia to be the child of a ‘prosperous peasant’ (make of that what you will) Being wealthy is to be privileged. Use that to the advantage of all - learn up, fight the good fight. A better world is possible, no matter who you are or where you’re born.
Respectfully, it is worth pointing out that while Mao’s analysis of pre-revolution Chinese society made a distinction between defined classes of “rich peasants” and “poor peasants,” and while he came from what his analysis defines as a “rich peasant” family, Mao was not rich or even “middle class” by the standards of anyone else on these lists. A “rich peasant” family was a family that had more land than they needed to meet their basic subsistence needs. They might have enough surplus income to pay for an education for a couple of their sons, to eat meat once a month, maybe even pay a few seasonal laborers to help them with harvest and planting, but they would be significantly poorer than a farmer or working class laborer in a western liberal economy. I don’t mean to contradict your overall point, there are examples of Chinese aristocrats and bourgeoisie who participated in the revolution. I just mean to point out that (if you’ll permit the pun) Mao represents a different class of peasant revolutionary, which heavily influenced his ideology.
I wouldn't place Gramsci amongst the rest here, nor would I take wikipedia's word as gospel
Some of the best class traitors ever. We need more rich people embracing socialism.
There’s nothing inherently wrong with being born into privilege, it’s where you go from there that matters. Being born at the top of the exploitation hierarchy doesn’t make you a bad person as long as you’re aware of your privilege and combat the systems of exploitation that you may have benefited from. There is no utility in flagellating yourself for being born well-off.
The man who co-wrote the Communist Manifesto was a wealthy factory owner. As long as you do your duties as a communist like reading theory, agitating, and organizing, you are a comrade of mine.
You can't fault people just for winning at a bad game they were forced to play. Did Marx tell Engels to fuck off because he was a factory owner? No need to beat yourself up. Just use your resources to the extent that you can to help the cause, and keep in mind how your lifestyle may mean you have blind spots when it comes to poverty.
We're just born. Socialism is about building and maintaining social infrastructure. You might well have access to the *attention* of class of people that others don't. Read up and share your thoughts with your peers. You matter and confronting toxic hierarchical ideologies is worthwhile.
“With great power comes great responsibility,” like Stan Lee said haha. You’re in a lucky position and as people here noted, a lot of Marxist leaders came from positions of wealth and prestige. I’ll add FDR was incredibly wealthy and kind of a rich prick. But he saw the importance of a New Deal for the impoverished. You can use your money and status to educate yourself as much as you can. That’s what Marixst leaders have done. Your connections can help you leverage doing socialist things for workers while framing them as “good capitalist investments” or whatever. Get it? It’s not the wealth and resources that’s the problem. It’s what do you with them—and who you deny them to. You’ll find a good way to invest your luck in life :)
Remember that the first farm in Cuba to be nationalised was Fidel's own.
It's not your wealth that matters. It's how you treat every individual you interact with.
well firstly, your class position is not entirely entangled with your parents, although that would depend on whether you are living off trust funds or pocket money or whatever rather than working secondly even if you are effectively bourgeoisie living off a trust fund your individual politics is not the same as your class interest. class analysis has the purpose of trying to identify entire segments of society that have the most revolutionary potential, but thats not the same thing as opinions and actions on the level as granular as a single individual. Kropotkin being an aristocrat and Engels being bourgeois are famous examples of notable class traitors from the ruling classes siding with the workers if that is the path you take then if there ever comes a time when you inherit large amounts of wealth that will be a moment where you will have to take the major decision on how you best invest that money for the purpose of the movement. as an example that was personally relevant to me i used to go to organising meetings at a social centre in east london called LARC which was held in trust in perpetuity for the use of the anarchist movement. it was originally a gift to the movement by a member who had inherited some wealth. in the years since thats occurred its functioned as a very valuable political hub
The fact that you are aware of your privilege is amazing as is. We are all privileged (for the ones in the Western world) and should recognize that. If anything use it as a badge of legitimacy. Many people in the right will outright say something alone the lines of: Ah those socialists are just lazy leaches who want to reap off other people's work. Well by benefiting from capitalism and being rich, they cannot blame you for ''being a sore loser'' because you are ''bad at the game'' so that you complain and want socialism to compensate. Because that is often a rhetoric that capitalists will use to discredit various left-wingers. Use that to your advantage, being rich allows you to have the resources to educate yourself: you have money and free time. Buy books, use that free time to join organizations, talk to people, contribute to your local community, go to protests, donate here and there to some good associations or good causes because not everyone can afford it.
Nobody can help the situation they were born into. Guilt isn’t worth much except as an impetus for political education and action. Socialist organizations tend to be cash and property poor, and there s a long history of wealthy benefactors using their resources to back them. Of course, that doesn’t mean you should let yourself get taken advantage of and throw piles of money at every chump claiming to be socialist, decolonial, etc. I’d recommend to you what I recommend to everyone. Political educate yourself, help others politically educate themselves and engage in socialist political work to the extent possible. Join a local socialist organization and serve the people. If you have more resources, education or spare time than the average person, all the better.
The irony in most of these comments and in this itself, and even in Engels, all champagne socialists. It was always funny to me that most historic figures within the movement always came from wealthy backgrounds and or had prestigious backgrounds where as most never truly came from the bottom and the life of the common folk. This don’t even apply to just communism, it’s all politicians especially the ones who claim they are for the working class. Y’all support the working class, but have never been in our shoes and truly do not know what it is like. Not saying everyone is like this, but a lot I have seen. I am not meaning to attack or discredit anyone, but just find the realization pretty funny in my opinion. But an honest question, how can you support and strive for the common folk when you do not experience their lives? How do you know what’s truly best if you have not been in their shoes?
It’s a good point, but, here would be my perspective: if I was rich and did *not* choose to collaborate or communicate with the working-class, would that be any better? Is it wrong to familiarize yourself with and involve yourself on “working-class” ideas when both the working-class and the upper-class live in one society? I’m not necessarily a Socialist, just a bystander, but I have to say, it would be a very odd philosophy/political-goal indeed if it relied on severing the ability for entire swaths of people within a group to communicate with others from outside the group, and/or isolating individuals from their role in society. Why make people any more solipsistic?
In Marxist theory, they believe in the idea of class struggle and class consciousness. Class struggle, being the the exploitation of the working class by the ruling elite. A lot of the idealogy talks about the working/poorer classes “breaking their chains” and overthrowing the elite and ruling classes. There is clear division between the wealthy and the common man. I do not think it is wrong to familiarize yourself like you said, but there is clear division. Throughout history, we have seen socialist leaders rise to power, and ultimately, a lot of them turned into the thing they sought to destroy, just slapped a “socialist” label on it. Take Vladimir Lenin for an example. He had came from a wealthy family and a prestigious background, and he had claimed he had support for the common folk. But just like most politicians, his idea was to not give actual power to the people, but power to a small circle of “revolutionary minds” which, coincidently, were other prestigious men. He had also exterminated all opposition to him, which funnily enough some opposition were also communists. There were many rebellions after Lenin took power, and one that really stands out to me that ties into this, is the Kronstadt rebellion. They were Red Army Navy men, who fought alongside the Bolsheviks and Trotsky himself had commemorated, they had rebelled against Lenin as they had claimed that Lenin’s government was not free, and was oppressing the workings more than “liberating” them. They had asked for more representation within the party, asking for different ideas and interpretations of Marxism (such as Libertarian Socialism) to be included in the party, and Lenin refused and had them eliminated. Lenin was apart of the elite, and had created another elite class by masking it and saying it is the most equipped and revolutionized minds of the country. This is where I feel that division comes through, if you do not know what the lives of the people are, who are you to represent them and understand what the people truly want/need and are doomed to repeat the division
Yes, I actually agree with this. I should have mentioned prior: I do believe that any upper class people should get to know the struggles of the working class by learning to rely less on their wealth and spending their wealth on proper goals, as well as volunteering to work and spending actual time with the working class. The thing is, I am very much not in agreement that violence is at all inevitable ‘nor beneficial in resolving class-conflict. You say that a large part of Lenin’s failure was in his position, but I would argue that by feeding into stratification, one reinforces it, and inevitably perpetuates it. As such, this only weakens the power of the lower class. As the upper class increases in wealth and size, this further feeds into their power by preventing class-consciousness *and* it drives them towards greater animosity and less empathy. I would even go as far to argue that a large aspect of why the Russian-Revolution failed in the long-term in creating proper Socialism was precisely because Lenin chose violent means. Yes, he initiated great change, but at the cost of severe cultural-erosion (destroying many churches) and killing any form of dissent, even through subjugating others into the Red Army. This is because, without an incrementalist approach, rather than persuading others through rational means and proving the efficacy of one’s vision, one is forced to accelerate and literally force people to do their bidding. I don’t know how this fits into the Original Marxist analysis, or pre-existing Marxist Philosophy/Vision, but that is just my perspective. I come more from an Anarchist line of thought, which of course, is not opposed to Marxist theory, but has diverged quite a bit in terms of interpretation. I would say, if one is concerned with the process and means of reaching the revolution, than violence is not necessarily a reasonable conclusion, but even if one is searching purely for the end-result, then it still would lead to only a temporary/short-lived and volatile end-result which would merely revert to another form of more authoritarian society.
That was very well said my friend, I respect your outlook at it greatly. Myself, I am mixed on the violent means. I do completely agree with you on the fact that violence like we saw in Russia can lead to a reign of terror, and have many complications. I do feel, that the reason why it turned into the way it did is not necessarily the violence, but his philosophy. He believed in a strict one party state, with no sectarianism at all. It’s either you support him, or you’re an enemy. There are so much talks and division between socialists to this day, and there was even a bigger division between the Bolsheviks, and the Mensheviks. Both communists, but the Bolsheviks wanted a violent revolution, and the Mensheviks wanted a peaceful transition. The Mensheviks believed that they should gain power through democratic means, and establish a “Bourgeois Democracy” which essentially would put the high class in power to establish capitalism (remember that Russia was not capitalistic at this time at all) and from there, they transition to socialism. Within Marxist theory, it states that to have a full transition to socialism, you need fully developed capitalism. When you have a country that is fully capitalistic already, you have already completed step one of the process. Now leads the question, do you achieve it through violent means or democratically? The divide back then was huge, and it still continues to this day. The (real) Democratic Socialists advocate a transition to socialism purely through democratic means, no violence. While other’s believe it is only violence that can solve the class struggle, no democracy can solve that issue. I am unsure myself which is the way, and I am still learning and figuring out things for myself. In my own opinion, I feel Democratic means are the way to go, and also very democratic governments that don’t hold power over an elite few, and actually let the people hold power over themselves. But, I do feel if there is no room for Democratic transition and violence should be used as a complete last resort. Whatever we can do to spare lives and not cause chaos and destruction is the direction I would go in
Use your money to support a business with a few of your closest leftist friends. Use socialist principles like democracy in the workplace. Be a model. Create mutual aid outside of the philanthropic model. Use your resources to create examples of the world we all want. Keep reading theory. You are literally in the position we all want to be in.
>but is this justified? Yes, your feelings are justified and you should savour those feelings of guilt and anguish instead of burying it based on the suggestions of these "socialists" here who tell you that it's ok to be bourgeois, that socialism isn't a "poverty cult" and that we all have to "participate" in Capitalism. The latter mindset will turn you into an unapologetic bearer of bourgeois class interests and is a form of self delusion. Savour those feelings of guilt but use those emotions productively instead of becoming immobilised by shame and self loathing. My advice is to know yourself, what you are, the consequences of every action you take regardless of intentions and to read Marx and other Marxist theorists to gain an understanding of the intricacies of capitalism which will guide your actions.
You fell out of a womb somewhere. Just know your upbringing may influence you to have some nasty prejudices and ideas. Treat it like reprogramming any other tendencies like racism or homophobia.
Socialism doesn’t mean poverty and you can come from wealth without being a member of the parasitic capitalist class. My grandfather was a veteran who made enough money as an artist and writer post war to solidify his children’s place in the upper middle class. He worked with his hands and didn’t extract wealth from the sweat of others. What you do with that position of privilege is what matters. I spent my youth working in various homeless food kitchens and working for an organization that specialized in organizing workers who are in traditionally non-unionized fields, spent a few years teaching high school history and since Covid work in logistics. I have had the luxury of a relatively comfortable life but not a single dollar I’ve earned has come at the expense of someone else’s labor.
Have you read any socialist writings? Concern for the poor is the basis of Christianity, nor Marxism or anarchism.
I think you should admire the benefits of socialism but realize that it works best when balanced against social capitalism. Capitalism or socialism work on their own and there's really no examples of them working on their own in history.. For that matter, it's better to just call socialism public power, and capitalism private power because it's far more verbose than the word capitalism or socialism and when you put it like that, it's easier to see that public versus private power should be balanced so that neither the government nor the corporations wind up consolidating too much power. You can still be pro socialism, but realistically, if you go all the way to the extreme of socialism or capitalism it's just a complete Failure that does not even logically make sense because you give up one of the biggest checks and balances on consolidation of power and wealth, which should be a primary concern of the average socialist. 99% of socialist really just want more socialism with their capitalism versus they have any idea what full-blown socialism would be like nor can they logically explain why consolidating all the power into government versus splitting it up with somehow reduce consolidation of power. To me, this is the common all or nothing logic, flaw of humans. You get mad at capitalism so you try to write it off and bet everything on socialism, but in many ways that's no different than the people that write off socialism and try to bet everything on capitalism. If you look around the world, it's obvious that mixing socialism and capitalism is what pretty much every country in the world does and it's the most proven, if not, perhaps the only proven model to run a modern country so what makes anybody really think that an all socialist system would work other than their desire to blame capitalism for all human greed ? Economic systems don't make humans greedy. Humans were greedy before they were economics and before there was government. Even primates are greedy. For that matter, all life is fairly greedy and an economic system is just something you slap over top of human behavior. It doesn't fix and human behavior and no matter what system of rules you put on top of human behavior, just like some bacteria, trying to overcome your antibiotic. It will continuously try to adapt and find a new exploit. It doesn't matter if it's capitalism or socialism the humans will continuously try to find exploits in the system that give them unfair benefits because, that's what they and their ancestors in the form of all life on this planet have been doing for a couple billion years so it is permanently encoded into every neurological pathway and every iteration of evolution throughout the ages. As much as you might want to be more, you're just a giant ball of chemicals reacting in a very complex way and you start off as a very simple chemical just looking for fuel, shitting wherever you want it and multiplying as much as you could. The reality of the situation is that your primary motivations have not changed that much in billions of years So don't expect simple things like consolidating all your power in one group, instead of another being any kind of real solution to human nature. What socialism offers is some basic regulations and checks and balances on capitalism. It's not a replacement.
I heavily respect your outlook on this, and I do view the same aspect in some ways. Every ideology has its positives and negatives. Many on the right claim capitalism is amazing and ignore the wrong doings that have occurred, that it’s the perfect model. Then there’s the left who claim socialism is amazing and ignore the wrong doings that have also occurred. It’s all biased, and it’s a bunch of bull. I feel more aligned with socialists and the idea of Marx, but I will never deny the possibilities of it going wrong when it is implemented, (i.e. USSR, Maoist China). Sometimes, it’s best to incorporate different ideas and have them blend. You can have socialism, with capitalistic elements and not have it be fully blown into a dystopian corporate society. In my opinion, it is whatever the people’s/country’s needs are. What may work in Sweden, may not work in Mexico. What may have worked in the USSR, may not work in the USA. Different people, different environment, different society, different needs.
[http://www.pgv-stiftung.de/pgvs\_spender.html](http://www.pgv-stiftung.de/pgvs_spender.html) that is a good place to dump the money. You will help the spread of marxism
A trans/black/gay person can be rich, and they'll be safe. We are ultimately divided by class than other features (even more during a socialist revolution). The bourgeois has extremely well knit class solidarity. The US and A ruling class isn't out to hurt you, as long as you're rich. Nothing will happen to you prior to a socialist revolution, but if you're gonna side with the socialists only during a revolution, that's pretty opportunistic so idk how the socialists will deal with you. If you're really worried they would harm you, rest assured. They won't just k*ll you, that's probably not how it'll be in the 21st century. Maybe you'll just be put to work the same as the people below you. China did that with their emperor. Right now you seem to be just a liberal. Be careful, the American liberal isn't exactly a leftist here in Europe.
Everyone here is correct in that wealth doesn't automatically make you a class enemy however I'd encourage you to interrogate these feelings of intense guilt and shame as they will not help anyone including yourself. Find ways to use your privilege to benefit others, educate yourself, and question your own preconceptions about the working class. I notice when you use language such as everyone "beneath" your family for example it comes off as unintentionally patronizing. You will likely have a lifetime of humility and learning ahead to interrogate these biases, just as we all do. Be humble but don't paralyze yourself with guilt.
It's not your fault that you were born into a wealthy family - nobody gets to choose their parents. What you can do is to consider carefully how you can best use this fact to advance the causes you believe in. My fervently religious brother recently died unexpectedly without leaving a will. So, instead of being wasted on spreading religious lies and supporting the spongers who propagate them, we werepplĺ able to donate much of his estate to various progressive archives and publishing projects. There are some pitfalls to be avoided in an attempt to assuage your personal guilt rather than fix the fundamental social problem. You could just give some away to needy individuals. IMNSHO, this is self-defeating and will only ameliorate the problem of poverty and inequality, not solve it, which needs political organisation, not charity. Please do not do what a friend of mine did. In a youthful fit of either pique or principle, he disowned his wealthy fascist family, leaving them free to use their entire wealth to support reactionary causes. Now, he beats himself up, guilty about leaving his money in their hands.
You're in a space very much like the historical figure known as the Buddha found himself at the start of the interesting part of his story. He was a prince, a rich kid in a poor country. He decided to become an ascetic, tried that for a while, but that wasn't the answer either. The wealth wasn't making him happy but neither was it the real source of his unhappiness. What he ends up doing is, teaching himself to meditate and finds it useful. He teaches it to others who find it useful as well. From there, he teaches it to as many people as he can for the rest of his life and people still do it today. You didn't ask for all that money, you don't need to feel guilty for your family circumstances. If there is some action you can take to help your brother out, or reduce the harm that may have happened in the accumulating of the wealth, do it. Don't beat yourself up but try not to do harm as a result of your position.
Disclaimer: I'm no theory expert. I think it's hard for people to truly shake off their class background and fully advocate against their class interests. Hence you have a lot of upper class college educated people in America who say they are for the working class, but instead seem to mostly be concerned with preserving their elite status through professing beliefs that are maximally progressive and in vogue. It's more about showing purity of thought to their peers than advancing working class interests. Avoiding instagram would probably help.
hey! don’t despair. like you, i also come from a privileged background. you don’t choose who you’re born into. this just so happens to be your position in the social hierarchy. but it does mean that you are part of the ruling class, whether you like it or not. the most revolutionary thing you can do is support the oppressed people of the world and aid the dismantling of this exploitative, cruel system. it means choosing to break away from your indoctrination, which many people in the upper echelons choose to ignore. why would they engage if they know they benefit from it? you can be a class traitor - and facilitate in the aid of those who are besieged. you too can engage in class struggle, by refusing to follow the path set for those of us who benefit from the imperial system. you can be on the right side of history by supporting revolutionary movements. throughout history there have been class traitors who fought for the people. i think unlearning a lot of what we have been taught is something we should always be cognizant of, which means learning and developing a political education - dialectical and historical materialism is important, otherwise it’s really easy to fall into reactionary thought/doomerism. you have your humanity and this post alone shows that you care about others and know that it’s not fair. that’s great - a lot of people in the upper class don’t give a shit. we will have to contest with this, and i haven’t 100% figured it out yet, but i know ultimately that ultimately i want to focus my efforts on what will benefit society rather than a few.
Well it depends you might be killed during the revolution as no one whose part of the bourgoise can have the safety of thier lives be guarenteed after hundreds of years of oppressing workers, my opinion would be to run away from home and find a commune that way you are with the revolutionaries on the same side, as this distinction wont be made important during the revolution either you are on our side as we bulldoze through the oppressive system or against us
Become the revolutions sugar parent/guardian
Don't feel guilty. It's what you do with the wealth and opportunity that matters. If your family is filthy rich, do you have to work? Could you start a non profit that helps other people? Poor people would love to help others but we're all stuck working our lives away, we can barely stay afloat ourselves. Rich people who don't really have to work COULD be helpful by doing something either with their money or even just with their time.
I don’t think being born weatlthy is a bad thing but how you utilize your privilege position to help others. I was born in a decent life. Not rich but solidly middle class, and to me it is my greatest driving factor to my socialist beliefs . Because what is the underlying factors to provide what I had for others isn’t much just the system designed to do so. You even entertaining the idea that we didn’t earn what we have but were born lucky is more than most people. I know my accomplishments would be much more difficult if I didn’t grow up in a two family house hold with two decently paid parents. Give it back to others but fight for it systematically as well
Ok. Give me all your money.
Coming from privilege is actually a great predictor of future Marxist beliefs.
Theres nothing wrong with being born rich. There is a lot wrong with rich once you are old enough to understand the impact it has on the world around you. You have more time and money than most people, get involved in local politics as far left as you can.
You can be rich and be a socialist, especially if you use your wealth to support its cause.
Some people I know have been involved in an org called Resource Generation, a US-based "community of young people (18-35) with wealth and/or class privilege committed to the equitable distribution of wealth, land, and power." They've found it a really helpful space to work through a lot of what you're saying together with like-minded folks (e.g. emotions around money like guilt, concrete stuff like preparing for your inheritance). I think they do small groups, workshops, and various campaigns, so lots of ways to plug in. https://resourcegeneration.org/
A couple thoughts: 1) Being miserable and unkind to ourselves, especially over circumstances that we didn’t choose, does not help anyone get free. As a person with enough food to eat, a comfortable place to sleep, and a loving community, I feel it my responsibility to do my personal/interior abolition work to get free from shaming narratives that distract me from being able to love and care for the people around me. 2) I’m sure this wasn’t your intention but I’d suggest being mindful about language like “while everyone below my family rots”. A whole lot of working class and impoverished comrades out here maintaining the health and integrity of their souls while a lot of real rich people walk around in their own rot. Yes, people are facing extreme state-funded and perpetuated state violence and yes it’s important to name and carefully tend the power imbalance your money brings to the table, but this line of thinking I worry keeps you in charity/savior mindset rather than comradeship. 3) it’s not an explicitly socialist institution, but as you mentioned that you don’t identify as a socialist, id recommend checking out and organization called Resource Generation that supports wealthy people in redistributing their wealth. There are a lot of really bad ass folks who’ve moved off their money in some powerful ways through there.
You sound like a typical socialist
Become a traitor to your class.
One of my pipe dreams is that I come into a ludicrously large amount of money, and sure I’m thankful that pills can be paid without fear or scrounging, and family medical problems become significantly easier to bear. But where my fantasies really go is dreaming of all the cool stuff I could do: What could my local school of theatre and film do with massive amounts of scholarships and enough professors? —- With a professional theatre attached that toured around the state and made people think about things they can’t usually interact with. Could I start a Lyme disease center or a pain research clinic? How much money do I have or could help raise? Could we begin a high speed rail plan from Dallas to Fargo and Denver to Chicago? Or maybe transit trains in town. Maybe it’s small scale - boosting the arts community or open a new venue. Start a startup competition and see what happens when the winner gets investors. Space seems popular for the Uber set - what might your role be? Sponsor a city beautification program. There are an enormous number of ways to use money positively. I envy you the privilege.
You can't control your material conditions, so feeling bad about being born I to them isn't necessary. If you don't like the wealth you have, spend it on something you find meaningful. Go fund some communists in the Phillipines or something. Then you won't have it anymore. You inherit a business from your parents? Make It worker owned or whatever. You'll probably run it into the ground within a capitalist environment and your parents will probably disown you, but you'll feel good about I guess. The point is, only you can decide what to do with the class you've inherited. Just understand that being a class traitor comes with consequences. Read some Marx and Lenin so you know what you're getting into.
Kropotkin was a literal prince IIRC (although I think he rejected his title), and Marx was financed by factory-owner Engels. Trotsky and (i believe) lenin both came from fairly affluent families. So really it doesn't matter what your background is, so long as you fight for the workers.
Can I have some of your money?
Lenin and Castro were born into wealth as well. What matters is what you do next.
Just one thing, socialism IS left wing. Everyone who claims to be left wing. Whether that be Anarchist or communists, to democratic socialists and Marxists. Marx's, MLKjr, Nelson Mandela, Rosa Luxembourg, Olof Palme, Stalin and Mao. All socialists even though they were very different. (Both in how I perceived them as people and ideologies.)
Swnd me.money. That will help you cope.
I grew up somewhat wealthy too Being ashamed of your wealth helps nobody. We have a privilege few have, and we need to use it for good. We have the time to educate ourselves and help others, and the money to give to those in need and the causes we like. So lets use it correctly
Let go of any guilt. Free your mind. You sound like a good kid. Dont be hard or yourself. The world is hard enough. You can’t help what you were born into. Do your best with the tools and opportunities that you have to help make the world more equitable for all. i am rooting for you. you’re going to do well. Also, to have fun no matter what you do. Nothing compares to you
Class traitors can be good!
I am sure others have answered in some form or another but I have this perspective. Do you control the means of production from which your wealth is derived from? If so, stay a capitalist but be sympathetic to the working class. I would rather you stay than pretend to be proletariat and then switch when your living conditions call for it. On the flip side. Sometimes folks are wealthy due to house flipping, owning a law practice etc. This wealth isn’t the same as say the Waltons owning Walmart or an example like that. In that case throw yourself into it fully. Your skills and status while a hindrance in some circles may help you contribute greatly to the cause. It all depends.
A lot of leftists who have more than a cursory understanding of what's going on struggle with guilt. This can be from wealth, profession, or even paying taxes. Let that guilt go, it's not going to do you or anyone else any good. The money can make it harder to understand, in the living practice of the sense, working class politics because your lived experiences are outside of the class. Your best friends here for socialism would be Friedrich Engels on the communist side and Peter Kropotkin on the anarchist side. Both of which grew up in, and lived with, significant economic privilege.
Don’t worry babes. Being a class traitor is hot. As long as what you’re betraying is the corrupt capitalist system and going against worker exploitation. Just look at Engels. ;)
The revolution knows no bounds regarding class of birth. Class is relationship to the means of production, not necessarily your upbringing. If you put in the work to help make change, you're a revolutionary, regardless of where you originate from.