Karl Marx and Fredrich Engels began The Communist Manifesto of 1848 with the sentence; “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles”. For the purpose of this thread, I would like to propose that Religiousforums.com is itself an arena of class struggle and that various classes are engaged in forms of class struggle on the forums itself.
I appreciate that this will seem somewhat absurd when taken at face value. Describing the interactions we have on religiousforums.com as a “class struggle” or interpreting them as part of human history is fairly grandiose. However, each of us are participants and makers of history in our own small way and the discussions we have on here are part the process of the realisation and struggle of ideas by which people make decisions that determine their behaviour. We all make history, even if none of us are going to end up on the cover of history books.
Additionally, there may be specific objections to the reference to “class” and “class struggle” if only because we experience the forums as the process of individual users debating ideas in discussions. These individuals do not identify themselves consciously with a class, nor do we understand the struggle over ideas necessarily as a struggle between classes, of which we ourselves are a part and our ideas are a product.
It should be clear that, for the most part, the content of the forums, the ideas expressed by its users and the discussions that takes place, are a reflection of many of the discussions that occur offline. Simply because these discussions take place on a relatively new medium, the internet, does not mean it is independent of the political and economic realities that exist offline.
In the same way we might understand books, newspapers and television as often expressing the views of the capitalist class who own the means of production in the printing presses and the broadcasting stations. Importantly, most of the discussions that occur on religiousforums.com are essentially discussing particular forms of media, such as a news article on currents published by the media and the recent publication of a new book and the controversies surrounding it. The forum acts as a means to debate the products of a corporate-capitalist media and what we discuss is usually only a reflection of what is in the news.
Whilst we may recognise ourselves as part of an online community, it remains ultimately the private property of the site owner and the staff ultimately have to work within the legal relations of a capitalist society in determining what content is permissible on the forums, balancing the need to maintain activity with the standard of that activity to maximise advertising revenue and profits for the site owner. Religiousforums.com is ultimately part of an online capitalist economy, based upon legal relations of capitalism, which transforms our voluntary contributions in to the site in to a marketable commodity that can make money through advertising.
If you are an older member of the forums, you’ll typically recognise that the forums goes through extraordinarily repetitive processes of discussion and counter-discussion based on topics that generate particular controversy and activity. Whether we like it or not, we exist in an online environment where we are compelled to line up with people who are sympathetic to our views against those who are in opposition to them, or else remain relatively quiet because we hold a position that does not “fit” into the mainstream divisions within a controversy.
This is particularly self-evident during American elections, where people ultimately endorse one of the two major-party candidates and a minority support third-parties or otherwise refuse to vote at all. It would be only a small step to argue that the struggle over ideas, in this context, reflects particular class interests and that the battle of ideas on the forums, is itself part of the battle between classes in wider society.
Do you think this is a fair interpretation of how the forum works or am I just a "commie space dog" barking up the wrong tree? Are there specific objections you have in mind that need to be clarified, or is it simply the very notion of “class struggle” that raises objections?
I appreciate that this will seem somewhat absurd when taken at face value. Describing the interactions we have on religiousforums.com as a “class struggle” or interpreting them as part of human history is fairly grandiose. However, each of us are participants and makers of history in our own small way and the discussions we have on here are part the process of the realisation and struggle of ideas by which people make decisions that determine their behaviour. We all make history, even if none of us are going to end up on the cover of history books.
Additionally, there may be specific objections to the reference to “class” and “class struggle” if only because we experience the forums as the process of individual users debating ideas in discussions. These individuals do not identify themselves consciously with a class, nor do we understand the struggle over ideas necessarily as a struggle between classes, of which we ourselves are a part and our ideas are a product.
It should be clear that, for the most part, the content of the forums, the ideas expressed by its users and the discussions that takes place, are a reflection of many of the discussions that occur offline. Simply because these discussions take place on a relatively new medium, the internet, does not mean it is independent of the political and economic realities that exist offline.
In the same way we might understand books, newspapers and television as often expressing the views of the capitalist class who own the means of production in the printing presses and the broadcasting stations. Importantly, most of the discussions that occur on religiousforums.com are essentially discussing particular forms of media, such as a news article on currents published by the media and the recent publication of a new book and the controversies surrounding it. The forum acts as a means to debate the products of a corporate-capitalist media and what we discuss is usually only a reflection of what is in the news.
Whilst we may recognise ourselves as part of an online community, it remains ultimately the private property of the site owner and the staff ultimately have to work within the legal relations of a capitalist society in determining what content is permissible on the forums, balancing the need to maintain activity with the standard of that activity to maximise advertising revenue and profits for the site owner. Religiousforums.com is ultimately part of an online capitalist economy, based upon legal relations of capitalism, which transforms our voluntary contributions in to the site in to a marketable commodity that can make money through advertising.
If you are an older member of the forums, you’ll typically recognise that the forums goes through extraordinarily repetitive processes of discussion and counter-discussion based on topics that generate particular controversy and activity. Whether we like it or not, we exist in an online environment where we are compelled to line up with people who are sympathetic to our views against those who are in opposition to them, or else remain relatively quiet because we hold a position that does not “fit” into the mainstream divisions within a controversy.
This is particularly self-evident during American elections, where people ultimately endorse one of the two major-party candidates and a minority support third-parties or otherwise refuse to vote at all. It would be only a small step to argue that the struggle over ideas, in this context, reflects particular class interests and that the battle of ideas on the forums, is itself part of the battle between classes in wider society.
Do you think this is a fair interpretation of how the forum works or am I just a "commie space dog" barking up the wrong tree? Are there specific objections you have in mind that need to be clarified, or is it simply the very notion of “class struggle” that raises objections?
