this post was submitted on 02 May 2026
1 points (100.0% liked)
Ask Lemmygrad
1316 readers
36 users here now
A place to ask questions of Lemmygrad's best and brightest
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Your answer is a very enlightening one that answers a lot of questions I had (especially the historical context and the fact that merely being unemployed does not necessitate you being a lumpenproletarian), though I am unsure if this determination of class character should depend on analysis at the family level. I am a bit confused as to why they were (and likely are) hardly elaborated upon.
I am unsure if what you say about the peasantry were accurate, since I always thought that they were relatively on board with aligning themselves alongside proletarian interests (assuming they are poor peasantry, of course), so hearing this is strange.
Class should be determined at the family level because people within families often depend on each other economically. The son of a wealthy family who works retail until he gets his inheritance isn't "Working Class", and his trophy-wife mom who signed a prenup and doesn't have a job isn't Lumpenproletarian either. The fact that they live together and support each other financially means their class should be considered at the group level.
As far as the Peasantry goes, the point I was making (and the point Marx makes) is that the Proletariat is unique in its revolutionary potential. There is a reason why we saw the rise of Socialism in the 1800s and not the 1200s, it's the development of the Proletariat as a class. Peasants certainly played a part in both the Russian and Chinese Revolutions, but neither of those revolutions would have happened without a strong, literate urban proletariat.
The Lumpenproletariat largely lacks the political literacy necessary to lead a true revolution. The only point where it may be possible is among people marginalized for their race, religion etc., like with the Black Panthers. The same factors that lead to drug addicts, criminals, and the mentally ill becoming lumpenized are the same ones that hamper their political literacy. But being Black doesn't inherently make it harder for a person to become politically educated, while it does make you more likely to be unemployed or seek out criminal or odd jobs due to systemic racism.
I think that class can be determined at the family level in the case of children, who if raised by proletarian parents are entirely dependent on the wage labor of their parents to live, so I think considering them a part of the proletariat is correct in that circumstance. However, if you are an adult separated from your family in some way and are capable of selling your wage labor (if you could not, then you would be like the children too young to work for a wage and your class would depend on those willing to support you), you yourself determine the class you are a part of.
It might also be possible if they developed class consciousness as a proletarian before becoming a lumpenproletarian, but that is a specific circumstance that not all lumpenproletarians will have (I happen to be a proletarian that might go homeless soon due to personal choice aggravated by difficult home circumstances). I also want to add that the lumpenproletariat (even those who are Marxist) are difficult to use because they have a hard time even surviving, so they will be focused on that rather than protesting or leading a revolutionary movement against American capitalism; in order to utilize them, you must uplift them out of their dire straits through financial means (alongside other aspects).