This article aligns with my own thoughts about the lumpenproletariat and whatever revolutionary or reactionary tendencies they may hold. Mazur however, insists that there is no lumpen-bourgeoisie or lumpen-elite. I disagree. The kakistocracy that runs the US (as well as many, many other nations) is unquestionably of a lumpen character, and there is ample evidence to suggest that there is considerable cross-class collaboration between the lumpen-elite and certain elements of the lumpen-proletariat (such as the situation in Chicago, explained above). One shining example of lumpen-proletariat values in action is R. Kelly, the Great Cradle Robber, who was allowed to get away with his fuckery for over two decades before his lumpen-elite promoters (RCA) decided he was no longer worth his weight in tarnished gold. More on the lumpen-classes later…
“Who are our friends? Who are our enemies? This is the first question of revolution.”
-Mao Tse Tung
“It is clear to us that the so-called lumpen class cannot carry our liberation struggle forward
on its own.”
-Black Liberation Army
One of the hotly debated subjects of today is around the Lumpen line, where the lumpenproletariat, that declassed milieu that Marx and Engels in the Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte called “the refuse of all classes” or “the decaying elements of all classes,” is elevated as the revolutionary subject of our time. The origin of the Lumpen line was with Bakunin in his criticisms of Marx and Frantz Fanon in The Wretched of the Earth. Fanon, though a revolutionary nationalist and anti-imperialist who defended the right to violence from the conciliatory French social-chauvinists of the revisionist Communist Party of France, had embraced eclecticism like many revolutionaries of the time…
View original post 3,890 more words