Probably so. Conventional proletarians tend to be instinctively conservative in the sense of disliking disorder and anything viewed as personally threatening. Insurrectionary activity tends to originate from those with nothing to lose and who do not mind assuming personal risks, i.e. the lumpenproletariat. “Lefty elites” merely regard insurrections as a wave they can hopefully ride to power. Working-class POC tend to have the standard lower-middle-class value system that’s concerned about protecting whatever property they have, maintaining their tenuous class status, job security, being safe from crime, avoiding disruptions to their lives, etc. Lumpens aren’t worried about any of that and the liberal wing of the bourgeoisie is largely insulated from it.
My experience with this has been interesting. I used to hold to standard lefty “workerist” views over 30 years ago. The experience of actually working with labor unions as well as supposed “anarcho-syndicalist” groups taught me better. I realized in the early 90s that it was going to be the majority-minority urban lumpenproletariat and the white rural/suburban/exurban lumpenproletariat, along with various declasse sectors from across the cultural and economic sectors that would be the basis of future insurrectionary activity, all of which actually happened during the past year.
The LA Riots, Ruby Ridge, and Waco all happened in the space of a year. After that, I realized it was the lumpen sectors that were the way forward. Even the nihilism and petty opportunism of drunks, druggies, and criminals make them useful as extra bodies during riots. I’d say the same thing about do-gooder middle-class protestors and the exaggerated sports rioters that come out of the woodwork during upheavals. Just more chaos agents to throw into the mix.
I don’t really think it’s a matter of organizing as much as delegitimizing the system to the point that it falls apart (like the Communist expanse in Eurasia from 1989 to 1991). I keep hearing all these Roosevelt idolators on the workerist left and a few on the populist right wishing for a new New Deal. They pin their hopes on some pathetic effort to do something like organizing Amazon workers in a single warehouse. But that’s not only to happen in a society fragmented into dozens or hundreds of warring tribes where no one agrees on anything. Let’s say someone was able to organize the homeless. Organize to do what? Impose rent controls? Build more public housing? Repeal single-family zoning? Squat abandoned buildings? The Third Worldization of the US economy is pretty much a given. The future of “homeless activism” is going to be homeless people attacking the cops with makeshift weapons when the cops try to clear the homeless from areas that are too close to bourgie gated communities. That’s how it works in Latin America. And it’s the future of class struggle in North America as well.
By Glenn H. Reynolds,New York Post
When Americans fight about race or culture, the fight is almost always really about social class. And that shows up in today’s discussions about riots and policing.
The Daily Caller recently sent a video correspondent to Brooklyn Center, Minn., scene of many police-shooting-related riots, and to Washington, DC, home of America’s ruling class, and asked people in both places when and if rioting was justified. The answers differed sharply.
In Brooklyn Center, where the destruction was visible firsthand, respondents (nearly all black men of various ages) overwhelmingly opposed rioting. An African-American man in an “Army Veteran” hat commented: “We’re human, and we want to be treated with respect,” but we also need to show “respect.”
A man in construction gear remarked: “I guarantee you the people that were looting, nine times out of 10, weren’t from this area. . . . If you feel the need to lash out, then don’t get mad when people, you know, address you as a looter or a rioter.”