What is "Class Warfare"?

[Traitorfish]

This is a term that Americans seem to have grown fond of in the last little while- uncharacteristically so, given that half of it is comprised of the word "class"- but I'm having a bit of a trouble figuring out what is actually meant by it. With the Tea Party types, it's straightforward enough: it's a term that they vaguely remember being associated with Soviet propaganda, and therefore must describe everything that is bad, naughty and wrong in the world. But I also see a lot of otherwise reasonable people, sometimes conservative but particularly liberal, using it to describe certain social phenomenon, namely, those which appear to express some economic or political tension between the very wealthy and the working (or "middle") class. I don't fully understand what they mean by it, what social dynamics they understand it as expressing, or how it functions as an historical process; at the very least, it doesn't seem entirely to overlap very heavily with the concept of "class struggle" that one might find in, for example, an IWW pamphlet. The word seems to have emerged spontaneously in the American political vocabulary, without ever actually having been given a formal definition.

So, let's talk about that. What is the social phenomenon that it describes? How does this phenomenon work? What is a "class" and how does it conduct "warfare"? Why is a term that, to a Briton, tends to suggest angry young men with facial piercings handing out poorly-printed anarchist newsletters c.1987, appearing so frequently in the mainstream American political discourse? All constructive answers will be appreciated.

 

[Dreadnought]

Class Warfare is a dramatic exaggeration for most economic differences today. Nothing in the sense that Marx had envisioned it.

 

[muhtesem insan]

In turkey we use "class struggle" and "class warfare" interchangeably, and i assumed it was the same in english. It suprised me that they don't mean same thing.

 

[Arwon]

Class Warfare is a dramatic exaggeration for most economic differences today. Nothing in the sense that Marx had envisioned it.

What does that mean?

 

[Commodore]

This is a term that Americans seem to have grown fond of in the last little while- uncharacteristically so, given that half of it is comprised of the word "class"- but I'm having a bit of a trouble figuring out what is actually meant by it. With the Tea Party types, it's straightforward enough: it's a term that they vaguely remember being associated with Soviet propaganda, and therefore must describe everything that is bad, naughty and wrong in the world. But I also see a lot of otherwise reasonable people, sometimes conservative but particularly liberal, using it to describe certain social phenomenon, namely, those which appear to express some economic or political tension between the very wealthy and the working (or "middle") class. I don't fully understand what they mean by it, what social dynamics they understand it as expressing, or how it functions as an historical process; at the very least, it doesn't seem entirely to overlap very heavily with the concept of "class struggle" that one might find in, for example, an IWW pamphlet. The word seems to have emerged spontaneously in the American political vocabulary, without ever actually having been given a formal definition.

So, let's talk about that. What is the social phenomenon that it describes? How does this phenomenon work? What is a "class" and how does it conduct "warfare"? Why is a term that, to a Briton, tends to suggest angry young men with facial piercings handing out poorly-printed anarchist newsletters c.1987, appearing so frequently in the mainstream American political discourse? All constructive answers will be appreciated.

To me, it means any action taken by members of one social or economic class with the purpose of promoting the demonization of another social or economic class in the eyes of the general public.

An example would be that fake "tip" receipt. Clearly the person who made the fake did so with the intention of stirring people up against the "elites" of our society.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

without formal definition

This world knows no civility.
How can you even sleep at night?

edit: Oh it reads constructive. Well I am sadly not familiar with the use of this term in American politics. I could only offer what I spontaneously would think to be a useful definition.
I have an constructive question: What is the difference between class struggle and warfare? Is it simply one of quality/aggressiveness?

 

[Core Imposter]

From the conservative perspective its an effort by liberal elites to whip up resentment towards those who are perceived as doing well by those who think themselves as being victims of some sort or another.

This is pretty much the same thing as creating dissension along racial lines, or sex, or whatever identifiable group. Its just a subset of identity politics. Its what liberals do.

 

[rugbyLEAGUEfan]

The end of result of people being too weak to actually engage their fellow man and instead cynically fire broadsides from afar

 

[Commodore]

This world knows no civility.
How can you even sleep at night?

edit: Oh it reads constructive. Well I am sadly not familiar with the use of this term in American politics. I could only offer what I spontaneously would think to be a useful definition.
I have an constructive question: What is the difference between class struggle and warfare? Is it simply one of quality/aggressiveness?

Well I would say there is no real difference between the two terms and they can be used interchangebly. That's my own opinion of course and probably shouldn't be taken seriously unless it makes sense to you.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

@MisterCooper
What a wonderful post You complain about identity politics of liberals (rightfully so) and by insinuating that this is a liberal specialty, you engage in it yourself. Classic
@Commodore
Most people probably couldn't tell the difference (as said, including me). But maybe some smart guy has a good suggestion and/or a good reason why it should be separated (Traitorfish seemed to think so).

 

[GenMarshall]

Well, there are two types of class warfare: Direct and indirect.

Direct is actively oppressing the poor by force.
Indirect is actively making the situation for the poor intolerable, expanding the wealthy-poor gap, and instituting barriers in class advancement.

 

[Commodore]

Well, there are two types of class warfare: Direct and indirect.

Direct is actively oppressing the poor by force.
Indirect is actively making the situation for the poor intolerable, expanding the wealthy-poor gap, and instituting barriers in class advancement.

You know, the poor can conduct class warfare too.

 

[GenMarshall]

You know, the poor can conduct class warfare too.

But who has the power and clout to do that? The poor may have the masses behind them, but the rich still has the firepower to disperse them via police or national guard.

 

[Commodore]

But who has the power and clout to do that? The poor may have the masses behind them, but the rich still has the firepower to disperse them via police or national guard.

I think you are taking the term too literally. As I stated, the fake 1% tip receipt was, in my opinion, a form of class warfare. Spreading misinformation and sowing confusion amongst the populace is part of class warfare as well. It's not all about protests and strikes.

The internet has also been a great asset for those amongst the poor who wish to conduct class warfare.

 

[rugbyLEAGUEfan]

The internet has also been a great asset for those amongst the poor who wish to conduct class warfare.

Or rise above it . Imagine if our avatars were replaced with our net worth . I'd like to think I wouldn't give a stuff

 

[Traitorfish]

To me, it means any action taken by members of one social or economic class with the purpose of promoting the demonization of another social or economic class in the eyes of the general public.

An example would be that fake "tip" receipt. Clearly the person who made the fake did so with the intention of stirring people up against the "elites" of our society.

Why do they want to demonise each other? Surely there's some more substantial interaction than that, or you may as well say that "war is an action taken by members of one nation to dispense of bullets in the direction of another". You yourself mention strikes and protest- are they not somehow related?

I'm particularly unsure as to what "class" is meant to describe, in this context, particularly as you're introducing a distinction between "social" and "economic" classes, which implies two distinct class structures. Is that correct? And, if so, how are they related to one another?

Well, there are two types of class warfare: Direct and indirect.

Direct is actively oppressing the poor by force.
Indirect is actively making the situation for the poor intolerable, expanding the wealthy-poor gap, and instituting barriers in class advancement.

This has the same problem as Commadore's answer: it doesn't really explain what "class" means or how a "class" conducts "warfare", it just list a few possible characteristics.

 

[Cutlass]

In the modern American context, as opposed to what a Marxist context might be, class warfare is actions by one group made intentionally for the purpose of making their socioeconomic class better off at the expense of a worse off situation for other classes. It goes hand in hand with a zero sum game view of the world, which is common among conservatives, but exists in many political groups across the spectrum. People with a zero sum game of the view see any benefit to themselves only from the harm to others, and any benefit to others only at the harm to themselves.

 

[Traitorfish]

In the modern American context, as opposed to what a Marxist context might be, class warfare is actions by one group made intentionally for the purpose of making their socioeconomic class better off at the expense of a worse off situation for other classes. It goes hand in hand with a zero sum game view of the world, which is common among conservatives, but exists in many political groups across the spectrum. People with a zero sum game of the view see any benefit to themselves only from the harm to others, and any benefit to others only at the harm to themselves.

What's a "socioeconomic class", in this sense? I understand what the terms denotes in a very general sense, obviously, but you seem to be describing that as positive, at least very broadly coherent entities, rather than simply as sociological categories, which complicates it a bit.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Class struggle: Kick the Tories out!

Class warfare: Kick the Tories in!

 

[Earthling]

Wow, it does seem like this would create some confusion for those who recognized they have not really seen the term before in American usage. I think I could help with the perspective. Also, Cutlass gave a good answer, particularly this part:

class warfare is actions by one group made intentionally for the purpose of making their socioeconomic class better off at the expense of a worse off situation for other classes.

I'd like to add that by far the most effective use of the term is in describing legislative or governmental actions. When legislation, regulations, or other actions are taken that affect one socioeconomic class the term class warfare might be used, especially if the action is seen negatively. If you're looking for a strict definition the word "class" is being used most commonly to indicate groupings entirely by income level. Example: Wisconsin's ongoing issue with public unions and bargaining rights, the action of certain politicians is described as class warfare for promoting policies detrimental to working class citizens. Alternatively something like raising taxes on high income citizens would be described as class warfare with the sense that it's going the other way - the masses forcing something negative on the wealthy class.

If you see the term used by someone promoting some fringe viewpoint they may use it in a different or broader sense. I don't think it's as accurate (or as common) a use of the term when you're describing something like a rich person being rude to a poor person in their personal life.

When used by mainstream media, it often refers to official or legislative actions or efforts by lobbies and political groups for the same. I would say in mainstream media it's probably a bit more common to see the term used by conservatives as criticism of various allegedly populist agendas, though certain more liberal sources have used it often enough.

I don't especially like the term in general, and it's usually used in an exaggerated sense. It's also, no real surprise, an effective term to use as a criticism without particularly upsetting a lot of people. A politician of any stripes is able to use the term to accuse another politician of something negative in a vague sense - "you're engaging in class warfare" is like "you're a flip-flopper." That said, the overall concepts of income inequality, social mobility, and a host of other socioeconomic factors in the United States are always worth talking about and promoting awareness.