Excellent point! But I thought there was some [post?] Marxist conception where the upper classes took some responsibility for the proles. [sigh] The problem with using "prole" is whoever reads/hears it might think I'm claiming to know more about class than I do. I should probably stick to words like "grunt" (Ground Roving Unit Network Terminator - https://churchofrobotron.com/).
Tangentially, this was a great read: Book Review: Fussell On Class https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/book-review-fussell-on-class On 3/9/21 1:57 PM, Steve Smith wrote: > I vote for prole(etarian) on the basis that it references the > class-struggles of modern times better, even though along with plebe > (plebeian) it has it's roots in Roman "Democracy". I also think that > the derived "precariat" gives it power-by-association insomuch that the > connotation of "plebians" is that the "patrician" class seems to have > accepted some responsibility for the various class roles in a similar > way to the "patron/peon" relation that typifies feudalism. A "prole" > would seem to be more truly fodder for "the machine" and is in > opposition to the "bourgeoisie" as much or more than the "nobility" or > "aristocracy". > > Of course, we have both words because they are both useful, I just think > most of your examples fit "prole" more tightly than "plebe". -- ↙↙↙ uǝlƃ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
