cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/34730043

For instance I know some lawyers and insurance CEOs who built the company themselves and run an ethical business model but because of innovation have made a ton of money. One lawyer has made a name for himself only defending those who have been hurt my big corporations and their life is ruined. The other made an insurance model that helps these hurt people invest their court winnings into annuities to guarantee they’re financially taken care of for life. These are not billionaires but both companies have won for their clients/work with hundreds of millions if not billions.

How can one clearly define someone like Musk or Bezos as bourgeois whereas these hard working individuals who came from nothing and build a huge business actually from nothing and help people?

Hoping for a non-black and white answer. My local MLM group declares everyone evil who isn’t their exact ideology. It doesn’t make sense to apply this thinking when someone whose become rich through helping people isn’t the same as someone whose has taken advantage of people for generations.

Edit: getting downvoted to hell when I am asking a question sure isn’t welcoming.

  • davelAEnglish
    6·
    5 days ago

    how do you divide bourgeoisie and proletariat then?

    Sometimes the two wikis even agree:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proletariat

    The proletariat […] is the social class of wage-earners, those members of a society whose possession of significant economic value is their labour power (their capacity to work).

    https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Proletariat

    The proletariat is the social class of wage-earners, those members of a society whose only possession of significant economic value is their labour power (their capacity to work) and owning no capital of their own nor the means of production and are forced to sell their labour power to survive.

    Both examples I provided come from dirt poor families.

    Where they came from couldn’t be less relevant.