Why is bourgeoisie such a taboo word in English...

If you believe in your nonsense scale of left to right.

Left and right are binary one is from.workers the other from bourgeoisie

And since the interests of the workers and the bourgeoisie oppose each other the binary scale makes sense.

haha yeah i did do some writing on Marxism for uni and had to re spell bourgeoisie 3 times before spell check even gave it every time
I think its mainly the UK has a very strong class system with its own terms. America has red scare even though they do definitely have one.
And here we don't have a class system in the same way. People are stuck in pvoerty circles and rich people keep that gonig but i speak somewhat bogan because im from regional queensland and went to a public school and go to top uni which costs the same as all others and ive never felt disadvantaged or talked down to.

We're slowly but surely regressing to neoliberalism which is pretty sad to see but we still have it much better than most of the rest of the world.

>Why is bourgeoisie such a taboo word in English?
not in ameriga because people here don't even know what it means lel

For centuries in America, immigrants and slaves provided new labor all the time. One either competed with them or moved slightly west to farm the infinite free land.
A lot of middle class people nowadays refuse to acknowledge how they derive their income. They will start a business by leveraging multigenerational family wealth and connections like any other well-off person, but act as if they are pioneers improving virgin land through their own labor.
Acknowledging the existence of bourgeoisie in America implies that there is also a worker class without access to capital or land ownership. It is politically unpalatable among bourgeoisie to admit that.

yeah same here. Used to be full on soc dem but de-regulating everything, weakening unions and privatising shit.
And what would you know wages have stagnated, public service is worse and we're in debt because of all the tax cuts to huge businesses which now all have close to monopoly.
And woops our ecnomy is based soley on a middle class buying lots of shit from kmart and fast food which they can afford to because of investment properties which are in a huge bubble because of boomer subsidies and chinks.

Bernie Sanders is just a labor candidate though. He wants the american workers to get a bigger share of the imperial spoils.

The only logical conclusion from this is that we should nuke America.
The 70's were real leftist hours over here. Praising Fidel Castro and attempting to seize the means of production through "Employee funds" (which obviously failed).

I know but having a sitting American president call himself a "democratic socialist" is bigger than you think. He used to be more hardcore earlier in life so who knows what he'll actually do (and what he even can do, doubt much of the democratic party would be behind some of his more radical proposals)

The only thing workers need are unions, and nothing impacting their freedom definitely not a government controlling them and the economy

Maybe so

azumanga doiah thread

Why not have the workers own the businesses themselves instead of a constant fight between union and employer?
Well I mean I dunno. He could easily improve relations with Cuba and Venezuela (something even Obama started doing before Trump rolled it back)

CAN I GET AN ORANGE JUICE?

あああああ Heil Osaka あああああ

Attached: 1565700544832.jpg (1600x1200, 365K)

>if you vote for a right-wing party you say that you're "voting bourgeoisie" because that's clearly what you're doing.
But you're voting bourgouisie even if you vote for a "left" wing party.

This.
The only true way to get a true left movement is through armed struggle. You cannot change the system within itself, you must destroy it first.

Attached: mao.jpg (850x400, 40K)

You're not cute