#the point is literally this society = bad! monarchy = bad! aristocratic power struggles = bad!

[maren-lesta-blog]

Star Wars, from a Marxist point of view

This post contains spoilers of The Last Jedi. I live in mainland China and the film won’t hit theatres until January 5, so what I say about the plot is only derived from the reviews I read, not the film itself. The TLJ spoilers about Rey are at the end, part 4 of this post. This post is recommended for Marxists who happen to enjoy SW series or SW fans that are not intimidated by the concept of communism. If your understanding of communism are ‘OMG Gulag!’, ‘BUT famines’ or ‘Jesus Christ it’s totalitarianism!’ then I suggest you ignore me and move on. Also this is not a formal analysis, just me mumbling jumbling to myself because none of my friends in real life watch Star Wars.

1.Jedi the Space Brahmins The whole thing about Jedi is blatantly and shamelessly Orientalist, like Disney’s Mulan level of Orientalist. The Jedi robes, the padawan hairstyle, the pseudo Taoist-Buddhist-Bushido-whateveritisyouwhitepeoplecanttellthedifferenceanyway hybrid philosophy, the ridiculously unscientific and ahistorical sword fights, and even the word Jedi itself - an American’s absurd misunderstanding of Japanese syllables… Every element is screaming ‘middle class shitheads jerking off by the bizarre delight taken from ancient mysterious Oriental otherness’. And jerk off happily they did, as every single SW film has miraculous box office. The capitalists who own the series are loaded. (Though, to be precise, only the Jedi masters are Space Brahmins, while the average Jedi knights are Space Kshatriya. The Jedi’s faith and morals and Yoda's 'enjoy every shit fate throws at you' attitude are basically Space Neo-Confucianism. Anakin was forcefully pulled up from Space Dalits, breaking the age-old norms. No wonder he later turned his back to Space Confucianism.) 2. Republic the Space Ancien Regime Orientalism aside, the Jedis are set up to be the good guys - the light side - during the entire Star Wars saga, while Sith, their opponents, are set up to be some sort of fascist-ish bad guys. This seems to be trendy among Hollywood blockbusters these days : the good guys are always some vague neo-liberal-ish (sometimes it’s even openly feudal, like Thor) individualist heroes trying to hold up the flawed but ultimately good status quo, while some vague ruthless fascist-ish villains trying to break the status quo so that hesheit could rule the world or get famous or get avenged or something. e.g. the recent Kingsman sequel and Thor sequel. As for the third route, coughrevolutioncough, well, it doesn’t exist. There could be Resistance and Rebel, but no revolution. There is no Galactic Internationale, only the rebels led by the literal aristocrats ( princess leia everyone) of the old republic, and the Empire led by the relatively new (compared with the centuries old Jedis) oligarchs. 3. Princess Leia the Space Hilary and Emperor Palpatine the Space Trump So, in contrast to the black and white version - the Star Wars ideology - which the filmmakers and fans try to present, the whole story of Star Wars actually goes like this: Jedi knights are the essential components of the State Apparatus, functioning as a violent force of repressive execution and intervention in the interests of the ruling classes in the class struggle conducted by the space bourgeoisie and its allies against the space proletariat. A proof for this would be that haunting scene in the Phantom Menace in which slave boy Anakin asked an armed Jedi knight if the Jedis are gonna free the slaves. The answer is no. And throughout the whole SW series no one mentions the abolition of slavery ever again. Why is it so? Because the ‘peace and order’ that the Jedis protect with lightsabres is precisely the societal system which is built on the labour of slaves - be it the feudal-ish serfs on the third worldly planets like Tattoine or the hired slaves on the first worldly planets like Coruscant. Padme teared up when she thought democracy died in thunderous applause, but the truth is there never was democracy in the first place.The Senators and Queens and Princes and Counts and Capitalists may meet in their air-conditioned council chamber while the actual labourer, the working people who produce every single thing in the Galaxy, have no say in anything, as they don’t even appear in the story. The fate of the Galaxy is decided by a very small group of people, usually force-sensitive, while the majority of the Galaxy is not even qualified to have a presence on screen. When oppressed nations(planets) want to free themselves from this fake democracy, the Republic shows its true nature by branding them seperatists and sending Jedis to repress them with violence, which resulted in fancy lightsabre fights. Well, the thing is, lightsabres are cool, and lightsabres are also weapons. The function of sabres is to cut people, not to cut fruit. By lightsabres alone we should be able to discern that Jedis are the instruments of State Violence, just like cops. They are Superpowered Space Cops. It is also very worth noting that the major seperatists are aliens instead of humans, and are located in the financially worse off outer rims instead of the loaded developed central planets. Still their highest leader is Count Dooku, white male aristocrat Sith opportunist who uses the righteous dissatisfaction of alien peoples to gain more power. And failed. Because white male aristocrat Sith opportunist Space Trump. (so dooku’s romney then) After the Jedi and the Ancien Regime were overthrown and replaced by the (i must resist the urge to say louis bonaparte)Sith, Space Obama Organa and his adopted daughter Space Hilary Leia came into the picture. Just like the Sith, they used the righteous dissatisfaction of the galactic people to mobolise rebels to work for their class. Thus, the plot of Rogue One goes like this: Space Aristocrat recruited Space Lumpenproletariat to do their bidding. Suicide squad was formed. The squad also contained two former minor Space Brahmins who were now overthrown and homeless. They were smashed, along with Space Julian Sorel Krennic, by Space Thiers Tarkin. Space Aristocrat continued to recruit Space Lumpenproletariat, the kind of rascals who shot first. This time also including third world farmer Luke. Fast forward to the Return of the Jedi, a fitting title for the film, as Jedi, the symbol of the rotten old world, is restored, just like the English monarchy was restored after Cromwell died, and continued to exist to this very moment. What a happy end for conservatives. 4.Rey the proletariat The self proclaimed progressive youth often complain about the lack of feminism/LGBT representation in Hollywood movies, yet they are perfectly fine with the lack of working class representation. Though this time there is one actual proletarian protagonist in the new Star Wars, at least by definition. Rey is nobody’s daughter, a natural phenomena among proles. As Marx famously stated in the Communist Manifesto, ‘all family ties among the proletarians are torn asunder, and their children transformed into simple articles of commerce and instruments of labour.’ Rey, sold by her parents, owns nothing but herself, her labour force. On Jakku she has no access to the outside world, the only way for her to survive is to sell the products of her labour to the landlord, who owns means of production, in exchange of means of living. Rey has no power over her wages, and could only accept what the landlord distributes to her, while the landlord could sell the junk she picked to outside buyers ten times her wage. And, like her predecessors, Rey is recruited by the galactic Aristocrat. Brainwashed by Bourgeoisie Ideology, she mistakes Space Ford for her father and Space Hilary for her mother, in a manner not unlike K in Blade Runner 2049. Old Luke, the Space Diogenes, laughed at her naive mindset, but did not correct her. It was only when she forceskyped with Space Snape that the illusion got debunked. Space Snape, like Wizard Snape, is a misguided young fascist. I say misguided, because communist revolution is a thought crime and the only acceptable outlet for anger at the Capitalist status quo is fascism. Better Nazi than Red. So Wizard Snape who suffered bitter poverty in his youth did not recognize his true enemy being unequal distribution of wealth, and turned his loyalty to fascism instead. Later, he went back to the vague neoliberal-ish good guys, because of personal romantic reasons. On the other hand, Space Snape, whose fate is yet to be set in stone, is neither a full blown fascist nor a penitent confessor kneeling at the feet of neoliberal justice. Yet. According to the spoilers, between Space Snape and Space Diogenes, the former actually has the moral high ground, despite the latter being the biggest Tom Sue self-insert in the history of filmmaking. Which is probably why the Last Jedi pissed so many old SW fans off, cuz it deconstructs their narcissism reflected in Luke. Personally I’d love to see Ren’s outcome in the next film. All in all, although Star Wars doesn’t play into historical materialism at all, but since no film is produced in a vacuum and is always made by real people living in the real world, it couldn’t help but shows some distorted mirror image of the politics of the Capitalist society we live in. It’s fun to do mental gymnastics with it.

[twoscoopswithdre]

From Bourgeoisies to Boujee!

Saying “that’s bougie” is derisive: it’s used to mock the pretentious consumer habits of an aspirational social climber. For an example of this use of the term, Thought Catalog helpfully provides a list of “32 Things Bougie People Like” including, but not limited to, “Milk products that come from basically anyplace but cows,” Lexus cars, and “anything artisanal.” So how did the bourgeoisie get the reputation for pretension and elevated lifestyles? It goes back to the history of the term and the class it’s associated with. In French, bourgeois originally just meant a “town dweller.” Similar terms with the same meaning English and German are “burgess” and “bürger.” Sometime around 1100, Europe saw a period of intense urbanization: people left their farms and rather dreary lives as peasants to seek their fortunes in cities. (The bourgeoisie has always been aspirational.) They became merchants and artisans (perhaps the ancient root of the “bougie” taste for the “artisanal”) and were granted special privileges as city dwellers. They were granted certain civic rights and responsibilities that peasants and the aristocracy (barons, dukes, earls, etc.) did not have. They formed a small section of the population and did not have access to the political power of the aristocracy, who owned land and, in some cases, pretty much owned people, too, under the institution of serfdom. In the course of seven centuries however, this initially modest group of traders and craftsmen became increasingly wealthy and important. They provided the aristocracy with their luxury goods from abroad, their paintings and sculptures, loans to fight their wars and finance their estates, their ships, their silk stockings, and the legal services to help tax their peasants. Gradually, the economic power and cultural importance of the bourgeoisie started to rival the grand Dukes and Counts of the old aristocracy. They were literate and liked to have discussions, and were often invited into the grand salons of their aristocratic betters, who patronized their amusing new ideas. Around 1700 with the introduction of coffee to Europe and the birth of the coffee house the rate of idea production of the bourgeoisie in France started to really accelerate. (An obsession with coffee is another abiding bourgeois trait.) The conversation began in earnest that maybe an aristocracy and a monarchy were really not such great ideas. Perhaps not coincidentally, it was also around that time that the image of the pretentious, vain, socially climbing bourgeois emerged. The title of Moliere’s 1670 comedy Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme, the bourgeois gentleman, does not connote a polite name for someone of that class. It’s actually supposed to be a pointed joke: only aristocrats could be gentlemen, a “bourgeois gentleman,” someone who sounds totally respectable now, was literally laughable. And so “bourgeois” became “bougie”: the second rate trying very hard to be first rate. But the thoroughly mocked bourgeois gentlemen would get the last laugh. In 1789, a coalition of dissatisfied Frenchmen, lead by the bourgeoisie and armed with bourgeois ideas about the liberty, equality and fraternity of mankind overthrew the monarchy and the aristocracy’s stranglehold on state power. They would eventually execute the King and a bunch of aristocrats and establish a republic. This naturally “unheroic” class of merchants, bankers, and lawyers would not get to keep their heroic costumes despite being the protagonists of the glorious French revolution. The unseated aristocracy, stripped of political power, still managed to use their cultivated snobbery to make the title of “bourgeois” socially undesirable. Artists and bohemians, who often came from the bourgeoisie, but harbored even grander pretensions than their respectable cousins, came to mock what was “bourgeois” as stodgy and conventional. The main sign of artistic success in the 19th and 20th centuries became the ability to shock the sensibilities of the boring, old bourgeois fart. One could be “bad,” cool, fashionable etc., but never “bad” and “bougie.” Boring and unglamorous as they were, they still managed to land the role of ambiguous villain in the new Europe. As they consolidated control over industry, and increasingly employed armies of underpaid workers to fuel their commercial empires, the bourgeoisie became the new oppressor in the eyes of many. Karl Marx, writing during another wave of revolutions in 1848, predicted that the need for the bourgeoisie to accrue capital would impoverish everyone else and society would increasingly split into two opposing forces: bourgeoisie, who owned all the capital, and the proletariat, the working class who produced it by their own labor. In Marx’s prophecy, the bourgeoisie was producing its own gravediggers: the workers would rise up against up the bourgeoisie in their own revolution and vanquish them, just as the bourgeoisie had ended the era of Kings and Barons and Dukes. Things turned out to be a little bit more complicated, but as Marxists never tire of pointing out, it’s not over till it’s over. To bring it up to the present day, “bourgeois” and by extension “bougie” is still not an unambiguously desirable title. It’s a very odd term that’s been applied to the most rapacious oppressors of mankind, who, far from being demonic characters, are simultaneously the most conventional and boring people on earth. It can be applied to great industrialists with the vast riches at their disposal to build the world’s railroads, cars, and social media networks, and equally to people with a bit of disposal income that have performative preference for kombucha. In the Black community, “bougie” has often been applied derisively to those who affect social superiority. The history of rap lyrics demonstrates a fraught class consciousness when it comes to “bougie.” The earliest lyric we could find in the Genius vault with the term is from Westside Connection’s 1996 “3 Time Felons,” where, not surprisingly, Ice Cube’s attitude is hostile: “I rack my uzi / On bougie niggas that pretend to be friend to me.” By Jay Z’s 1999 “So Ghetto,” the classes have reconciled somewhat but the class struggle still persists: So I’m cruising in the car with this bougie broad She said, “Jigga-Man you rich, take the durag off Hit a U-turn, "Ma I’m dropping you back off” Front of the club, “Jigga why you do that for?” Jay is willing to hang with a bougie girl, but cuts it off immediately when she acts stuck up about his appearance. As the 2000s went on and the fortunes of rap grew, it’s maybe not surprising to see the mentions of “bougie” become more frequent. By Kanye and Jay’s 2011 “Niggas in Paris,”, an anthem of triumphantly acquired class status, Kanye raps: Bougie girl, grab my hand Fuck that bitch; she don’t wanna dance Kanye, the self-proclaimed genius, demonstrates the classic artist’s attitude to the bourgeoisie: they are boring. The class struggle has evolved from the out-and out hostility of the gangsta ’90s and given way to snobbery in the 2010s. History so far is following a familiar pattern. But now, with Migos, a new era in the history of the class struggle: simultaneously “bad” and “boujee,” no longer dull and dowdy, but sexy and seductive. Marx might appreciate the irony: the name for the class that sought so many status symbols is now itself a status symbol. So maybe the revolution is around the corner and the Migos are its prophets. #BadAndBourgeoisies #BadAndBoujee #KnowYourselfKnowYourWorth #BlackAuthors #JonezWritesInc #TheJonezAndCo #BloggerofColour #Blogger #BlogsToFollow #DoingTheWorkIn2K17 #ClassIsInSession #