Its a big club and you’re not in it (well maybe YOU are, fucking redditors) 
Woody Allen is the most bourgeois filmmaker I’ve ever seen. Can you name a single black person in his countless whitewashed movies about “iconic New York City”? There’s the one sex worker named “Cookie”. It makes sense that PMC class character would make even Jewish people hate their black neighbors as much as white nazis in suburbs…that actually explains a lot about Hannah Arendt’s contempt for eastern European Jews in her holocaust revisionist journo propaganda lol
Mid BMF post.
Every time they get banned they lose a little bit of their posting power. The posts get shorter and shorter and I feel less and less confused but in like a bad way. Let my boy post!
A funny possibility: Each time BMF gets banned, they never actually return. All of the neoBMFs have been other posters who have been possessed by the spirit of the blackkk mold maoism.
Also this isn’t actually BMF, it’s just someone posting as a language learning aid to track their progress in Maoist Standard English. You can tell they aren’t a native speaker due to the lack of random allcaps words and the presence of additional places “KKK” could have been used, but weren’t. Come on, gimme a “New YorKKK City”
PMC is an incoherent pseudo-class because its parameters are poorly defined. People will use PMC to refer to pedophile academics and then turn around and use it to refer to people with communications degrees and blue hair because they’re mad at a post they saw on twitter (you fucking losers). Operationalize your terms and get back to me when you can do basic statistical analysis. It was already a shit analytical tool when Ehrenreich created it and it’s only devolved in popular usage since. Like at best you could use PMC as a blanket term for a coalition of similarly oriented class interests but there’s a massive gap between the petty-boug, the credentialed professional class(?), and corporate managers let alone where a pseudo-feudal group like academia fits in
There’s a decent argument I heard in a book called How Capitalism Ends that makes a solid argument for the recognition of the Technocracy (and kind of the PMCs for similar reasons) as a separate class from both the bourgeoisie and the proletariat in recent times, here’s the excerpt:
It’s important to note that the technocracy are not excluded from the proletariat because they earn too much money, or because they enjoy a large degree of autonomy in their work. It is the effective (though incomplete) control they exercise over productive assets by virtue of their technical knowledge that separates them from the proletariat. They make largely autonomous decisions about how and where productive assets will be deployed, and the expert knowledge which gives them the ability to do so puts them in a different relationship to both the means of production and to the bourgeoisie than that of the proletarian. At the same time, they do not enjoy the full range of ownership rights over the assets they control – they cannot sell or bequeath them for example. This limitation sets them apart from the petty-bourgeoisie.
Most of these traits are shared by the PMC as well
The book’s decent but it’s fairly anti AES (although it only comes up like twice in the whole book and for less than a couple sentences each time) and a little bit trot so tread carefully. Very good for getting new lefties on board with the economics of Marxism without having to have them buy into China good immediately.
