Hello to friends from Sunrise Movement,

It has been a long time since I have committed at all to write anything of a blatantly political nature. Various circumstances surrounding the events of October 7th, my work during those months, and subsequent challenges in my personal life that lasted from the end of winter through the middle of spring have kept me away from everything I’ve wanted to do for a long time.

I would like to re-introduce myself to the good people of Sunrise Movement. Not as an activist, pending, aspiring, or even just a little. I am just me. No one reads anything anymore, so of course I don’t think it will be much trouble if I ask us pretend we just met. I am one of the millenial generation who still believes in revolution, but has his life’s ordinary worries and joys to tend to. I live with one good friend. He is making his way through the Sopranos. Sometimes I watch, and mostly disappear when his partner comes over. I live in the basement of a working class suburban house in Maryland. And, hopefully, at 32, I will begin a sociology master’s program, and further advance my more lofty aspirations.

Now is the time of patience and planning.

I work now as a cook, in a deli that is situation a half-mile away from the projects in Annapolis, Maryland. Before I had any exposure to the work circuit of professional activism, my life lead me through the kitchens of places high and low. I’ve flipped burgers with the best of cigarette-smoking masters and high-decibel-loving stoner geniuses, with their comedic spellcasting and lyrical declarations of inevitable fame, each on the verge of a major breakthrough, always spelling out their plans to bring their lives into some new and great perfection. Cook life is the life of marathon labor. Before this job, the most notable stretches I recall are getting up at the ungoldy morning hours to burn my life away from 5 A.M. to 10 P.M., then was different and I was the apprentice of a decent chef. Every weekend we cooked breakfast, lunch and dinner for crowds of 200 people, a staff of three. Sometimes guests of niche renown would be ones people would come, we’d cater for them, at a retreat center in the mountains of New England. We’d prepare dishes of seafood, chicken, dips and sauces ranging from simple guac to some tangy-barbeque thing, assortments of snacks to compliment the main dishes which would range from something as simple as eggs, sausage and bacon (always with vegan clones to boot), to some actually pretty nice “fancy” middle eastern cuisines. I don’t know. I remember I liked it when a Nepal friend showed me how to make really good tofu tikki masala. And it is a source of discrete personal despair that I do not remember the recipe.

I even learned once how to make lobster, which I would never eat. I don’t understand the association, either, between some lobster dishes and high social status eating habits. The idea is pretty gross. But I guess a lot of “sophisticated” class things turn out to be gross.

But not to over-indulge a romanticism of image, a good deal of kitchen life in non-gentrified areas is, more in the subset of working class culture (if there is such a thing in the United States) called “the precariat.” For those who are less academically inclined, it might be more useful to think in terms of “gig economy” than career work. (If any of you have worked in a kitchen and one of the first things you hear is “yeah man, there’s a pretty high turnover rate here,” you know what I mean.) And for those who are more-versed in classical Marxist thinking, the term “lumpenproletariat” is most immediately useful.

In fact, the whole debate around whether the “precariat” or lumpenproletariat possess revolutionary potential is, to my mind, the most important question for the United States today. Marx himself thought that the lumpenproles were both politically too far gone and even ideologically driven against the aims of revolutionary politics. The precariat is the servant of the spirits of crime and disaffection, he is hopeless therefore and cannot be realized as an asset to the proletariat cause.

Huey Newton of the Black Panthers thought otherwise, and his whole vision of a revolutionary program, which included the free breakfast for children program, and various medical services, is something that comes out of his belief that, in fact, the lumpenproletariat were where the future of revolutionary activity was going to inevitably find its footing. He said this in 1970:

“If revolution does not occur almost immediately, and I say almost immediately because technology is making leaps (it made a leap all the way to the moon), and if the ruling circle remains in power the proletarian working class will definitely be on the decline because they will be unemployables and therefore swell the ranks of the lumpens, who are the present unemployables. Every worker is in jeopardy because of the ruling circle, which is why we say that the lumpen proletarians have the potential for revolution, will probably carry out the revolution, and in the near future will be the popular majority. Of course, I would not like to see more of my people unemployed or become unemployables, but being objective, because we’re dialectical materialists, we must acknowledge the facts.”

So that debate continues up to today, and takes many different forms, including in the mainstream of the leftwing mediaverse, where podcaster after podcaster asks questions about Trump, populism, and if Trump’s enchanting of the “working class” can be re-imagined as a group that in-fact might have latent potential for leftwing designs and possible visions.

I am here, both as an affectionate veteran of cook life, and as a sociologist, trying to understand my own position on these things. Some might think that this is “the way I entertain” myself to get through work that is clearly not very monetarily rewarding. But I insist that it is my most sincere desire to gain a clear understanding of the varying maladies of our expanding precariat class. It will only continue to expand, by the way.

The question of this potential must be answered, and it must be answered now and not later. It is not that anyone should be expected to become activists or revolutionaries necessarily, but certainly, I believe that the precariat’s experience and interests could hold the keys for unlocking a greater potential than we currently see, basically anywhere in the United States political landscape.

As activists, we are looking to bring something into the world that we’ve never seen before. Some change in the collective way of life that results in greater happiness, sense of material abundance, freedom and security. And by now, it is in-fact necessary that we push our understanding to endeavor toward something genuinely new in terms of where we aim to look and who we aim to get the attention of, who we aim to rouse an effective response from.

And that of course is connected to things that are not new. Revolutionary tradition, after all, is still tradition, and has generations of precedence. So let us think about the precariat once more and its connection to the history of revolutionary thought. Let us as progressives and liberals “come out of the closet” in our private enjoyment of communist history. It’s at least fun to think about, even if those ideas have antiquated value by now. Oh well, what’s old and cool at the same time is called “vintage.” And what’s vintage never dies.

Classical revolutionary theories desire to see the mythical “awakening of the masses.” Some believe it spontaneous, almost spiritual in nature, like Rosa Luxemburg. Others believe it to be an inevitability, a consequence of the capitalist system itself — that rage and uprising will follow causally from the suffering that is the outcome of material relationships in the capitalist design. (To my mind, that sort’ve thing borders on theological reasoning, and so I believe that activists who desire the maintenance of an optimistic outlook avoid that line of reasoning altogether. Blind faith is no real faith. We must use a hope that illuminates our sight.)

And of course the most pragmatic of all are those like the best in Sunrise Movement, who remind us to organize, organize, organize. And perhaps steadily, but genuinely, the sleepy eyes of the most disenfranchised will be brought to the awakening. (As a matter of fact, critics of Luxemburg in her day held the same view, and thought her notions of spontaneity neglected exactly this kind of pragmatism, that she basically had attributed magical qualities to what magicians know is a magic trick. Behind the theatre of every great mass protest is a lot of work. It’s a lot of work.)

It is my belief that the lifeblood of what now characterizes “the masses” is in-fact, not present in the middle class or professional class at all. I want to specify that this is actually distinct from past complaints I’ve made personally, and have since seen generalize, regarding middle class politics. I don’t think it’s worthwhile anymore to spend one’s time critiquing the minutia of “The Professional Managerial Class” or even talk too much about the limitations of Non-Profit activism. Those problems are real, and very important. But as well, they are not definitively the obstacles to dealing with the maladies of our age.

Instead, I am interested in how the position of the educated and engaged could somehow be enhanced in its effectiveness. And so, as left scholars like Chris Hedges have pointed toward the “disappearing” of the middle class, let’s treat the middle class as a dynamic that is not, in-fact, representative of a great proportion in our aspiration to awaken the masses. Its problems and limitations are not a priority compared to assessing potential routes forward in the project of initiating collective awakening. That the precariat class are actually where the numbers are, this might seem too bleak and somewhat premature to declare. But to deal with this problem and to contemplate it as if it were so goes beyond the realm of mere abstraction and hypothetical.

Our United States politically is in a chronic crisis, to use Benjamin Studebaker’s term. And so inflammations of a chronic condition means that what appears now as one minor symptom will appear later as a usual and regular symptom of our great and terrible disease. Like allergic reactions to some foods, one episode that appears minor, could be fatal after a few more instances.

Let us be assured that a study of the precariat from a sociological lens is not, truly something to be met with the usual, detached, statistical and sophistical demeanor of a lot of subaltern studies. It’s not as if middle class people need to go to work-training meetings to help them adjust their language and perception of how they think about the fact that being poor sucks. That is another way of saying, too, that it is also useless for educated liberals to go on corrective tangents to poor people using words like “retarded.” It has about as much moral value as obsessions about “grammatical correctness,” which is zero.

So rather than viewing the precariat and its various behaviors as rife with complexities of irreconcilable racial tensions and what-not, let’s try to start with a very simple fact about the differences between the middle class and the poor: It is not the same to live a life where money is always a problem as it is to live a life where someone struggles due to various race-specialized and gender-specialized mistreatments but can go home and ultimately be okay, especially if they have friends to call.

For those in professional activist circles who post job offerings for activist groups that range anything above 30,000 a year, it should be stated that that kind of thing is pretty unimaginable for a lot of people just as smart and politically conscious as anyone coming out of a good college. The fact that it’s unimaginable is important to emphasize.

The problems and life experiences of the precarious population are so dramatically different because of never having money, that even the self-styled moderate liberal is required, at this point, to acknowledge their genuine absence of understanding. They lose so much ground because the game has changed so much. And while the cracks had opened and so many had fallen through, many liberals still waste time in rationalizing the gap between them and those further to the left, by way of emphasizing Biden’s “accomplishments” policy-wise. A lot of “realistic” advice from Democratic Party supporters generally are nothing more than parochial attempts to quell the disgust of their more avid socialist friends.

Advocates of centrism fail to notice the vanishing legitimacy of their point of view. But it’s interesting to me that we as socialists don’t act like that legitimacy hasn’t already lost so much ground. It is strange that there is still this reflex to appease — and we temper our own observations of liberal and centrist failure with our revolutionary principles. Somehow we decide to “meet in the middle” of capitalist liberals’ chiding us into submission. This is how we get into a situation where we negotiate constantly between some attitude of “acknowledging” and “celebrating” a Biden action concerning climate change, all while so much of Biden’s work on the environment has been neglectful at best, and even co-operative toward the goal of securing continued fossil fuel usage and control of resources. By now I am sure many people are tiredly familiar with the situation of a conversing with some Biden supporter, who is defending him and his programs, while as activists and revolutionaries it is plainly impossible to stand by a guy who gives so much money to fund a genocide, and the idea that “at least this would be worse “under Trump” is simplistic to the point of contempt.

As someone who has been engaged loosely in socialist politics and anarchist projects since the days of Occupy Wallstreet, I am certain that the preference in our thinking about progress needs some reworking. The sort’ve familiar tug-of-war between centrism and leftism is a fictional theory of progress, and I’m sure that it helps everyone maintain a sense of composure, and it has been helpful to some extent in maintaining a sense of social cohesion, which, it could be argued, is responsible for the acceptance now of anti-capitalist politics as a socially “ordinary” set of beliefs.

But I think as far as furthering the aims of revolutionary change that could save the world and avert climate-change related catastrophes, it is not the way that will successively produce a popular uprising. Trump’s imminent return, and indeed, his first term, would not be something we’d ever have to think about if this incremental demeanor and preference was the best strategy for building coalitions, and generating a political movement that gains access to the population at large in a way that inspires them.

So let us search as if we haven’t before, and try to see anew in our aspiration, to stir the masses with a politics of liberation. From what I can see, coming from my own years as a self-taught former vagabond, and now as a worker in a deli in the projects, I believe I can provide some casual insights, basically footnotes that might be helpful in gaining clarity toward that aim. At least humor me, I know that being a cook and also being formerly homeless don’t amount to that much, in terms of “credentials.” But these things I know and I also know that a lot of university-originated activists do not.

I have thought a lot about the futility of a lot of debate culture and the pointlessness of “consciousness-raising” styles in activism. If we could educate the people away from their ignorance, surely they would then understand and take action to stop what they know is wrong.

Yes that is sensible in a lot of ways. Look at the waning support for anything related to Israel’s genocide. And the subsequent, near-schizophrenic divide between the popular will and the political class. The debate between Trump and Biden was stunning to watch, as they tried to one-up the other in their insistence this one will either “continue” to support Israel, or that one will continue to support Israel “even more” than the other guy.

But consciousness-raising did win the majority of the population over, I believe. It also reveals the fact that a lot of social movement based concerns need to deal with the fact that, at some point, where knowledge is no longer the problem, dealing with and being willing to confront the system of power is something we have to be ready for. The system, with all of its tools of media confusion, violence of varying degrees ranging from police oppression to, in special historical cases, outright assassination (a la Fred Hampton), and otherwise the ruining of people’s lives through creative forms of surveillance and manipulation are what people in power are ready to do to stop us from achieving things.

This is why mass-scale awakening, aimed at a kind of political engagement that goes beyond electoral politics has to be met as a practical and necessary aim for any activist movement at this time. While we have talked about Trump’s threat to liberal democracy and the gains of secular diversity, as well as the dangers he poses to the traditional structure and the “balance of powers” that make up the US system, success in any form will only be possible if we begin to think about ways to mainstream a concept of “defending democracy” that also acknowledges we’ve never really had democracy — structures of decision-making for a city, made by people of the city themselves. As every dystopian sociologist likens our Empire to the decay of Rome, we should likewise allow ourselves to think of Athens, even now, and maybe especially now. And in my opinion it would be useful to think in terms of a “democracy revolution” and bring that into our discussions as a desirable aim. This, of course, alongside the more feasible and traditional goals of gaining some considerable wins through federal-scale victories. To find a way that clearly articulates these two things as a unified end is necessary if we are interested in freeing ourselves of the non-choices given to us by the Democrat and Republican party system.

That such a vision could be argued as somehow politically-viable depends on some speculation, but I think it can be argued as fairly sane and not utopian. We should begin with the assertion that, at this stage, the knowledge that the system has failed everyone, and broken the hearts of millions of people is not something they need anymore education on.

In a lot of ways, we confuse the idea of “the people” lacking knowledge with the fact that “the people” don’t see any other good ideas being put into action. And so, like every sensible person, we take what we can get. Liberal media consumers think that means voting for Biden, who is not overtly an awful human being. And rightwing media consumers vote for Trump, who at least acknowledges that, as fucked up as he is, he at least knows the whole damn system is that much more fucked up.

So how to do we change this conversation? Here, I think it’s important to argue positively in favor of the political potential of the precariat.

Every poor person knows that “the government” wastes all of its money bombing the shit out of other countries for no good reason. And when a Democrat suggests, and fails, to pass a bill that would, perhaps, expand Food Supplement availabilities by some amount less than a hundred dollars per month, it is rightfully the cynicism of the poor, who are all-too-familiar with this display of false hope, to scorn the flaccid lack of imagination that preceded the failed effort. Why is $15 dollars an hour in Maryland so great? Selling drugs does actually make more, and even that hardly pays rent. So of course another “effort” failing that wouldn’t have changed that fact is the same thing as no effort at all.

We are left with the question as to why no one proposes the abolition of all war projects and the immediate funding give every person a house and a monthly income, just because. Since everything fails, including “practical” proposals, the poor person figures, quite reasonably, that impractical suggestions, such as immediate abolition of prisons, nuclear weapons, and billionaire-status income should be proposed by SOMEONE. At least that would make headlines, would it not?

It is her understanding that should be applauded for its fragmented futurism, because she knows all-too-well that no one will help her. And because the world is already absurd, and insane, it might as well be said that some politician who would propose complete overhaul of military expenses and give it all to make the lives of her and her friends better right fucking now is what she actually wants to see. When Bernie Sanders’ rhetoric came on the scene, there was some glimmers that something like that was possible. And for a time, the concept of a universal basic income was floated by association through Andrew Yang. And daily conversations about how different one’s own fucked up life would be if they had that kind of opportunity, that kind of daydream was household.

But after COVID, Trump’s chauvinism daily shown by liberal cynics profiting on outrageous headlines, the effect was not only to produce ignorance, but it was essentially demoralizing to the point where everyone forgot a world of possibility. Everyone.

So the system’s failures produced a mass-scale amnesia, and that fact is present in the atmosphere of many of the customers that come through late at night. Wired, drunk, stoned or strung out makes no difference. Every beggar who wants something for free, to my mind, has come to a reasonable conclusion about the lack of care and help from his society. In fact the “lack of help” is something that the salary-class manager understands quite well. When the manager of xyz-store denies the pleading of a beggar, and receives a verbal beating in response to his “callous” refusal, it is worth noting that by convention of his position this deli manager feels he must stand his ground in denying service, lest too much generosity result in some franchise director finding out about charity running business amok, and our poor salary-class cashier lose what he has, and the life he’s managed to gain, for the sake of family responsibility. And this community college dropout has managed to get enough money to “have” a “life.” And succumbing to more charitable impulses would lose him what he has. That is not an indictment of privilege. It is, actually, proverbial knowledge — no good deed goes unpunished.

Somewhere in the sleepy privacy of his apartment runs in the background a Youtube podcast that shits on Elon Musk and the rich. But the idea of anyone anywhere actually being able to do anything about it is, of course, unimaginable. And so sleep takes hold, and a dream becomes a dream that is forgotten.

This is a good example of how to understand things as an output of policy, primarily. It is also a good way to understand all common social animosities as arising from the demoralization of people by capitalist life, as opposed to stupidity or some innate prejudice. It is actually worth it to emphasize that talk about sexuality norms, neuroses of personality, generalized shitty inter-personal maneuvering is a consequence of, firstly, and a cause of, secondarily, things that then are described as “unconscious” discrimination. Even at the precariat level, corporate policy requires obedience. And that resentment at the fact that no one is free needs an outlet. But it actually does not take “years” or “generations” for ordinary working people to end up hating their lives and everyone around them. Anyone who has had to deal with a fury of dissatisfied customers while sleep deprived knows it only takes that much, and a frustrated worker ends a shift thinking quite differently.

And the workaholic cannot see the merit of the thief’s line of reasoning. Anyone stealing from any store knows this food isn’t anyone’s personal belonging, and it sits there for free, ends up being thrown out, and they see no reason why they shouldn’t steal when they can’t just be shown some decency while being hungry and it’s hot as shit and what kind of asshole wouldn’t just give them something to eat.

The cynicism of the precariat criminal is actually a product of his intelligence. It is perhaps more substantially useful to take note of the absurdity and irony he is keenly aware of. However incoherent his rage at the store manager initially appears to be, and whatever momentary relief is provided by this or that thief’s banning from our deli following the invocation of a “right to refuse service,” it should be noted that these situations and problems are the outcome of major, real failures of politics. In a literal sense, these interactions, a mundane and near-daily occurrence, are an outcome of political failures, directly tied to capitalist reality and its state of increasing decay.

But so our would-be customer goes out, he is alone and not alone, in the muted company of the great legion of unemployed.

But even those who are not managers share a similar sense that they are doomed to be alone. For the workers in this situation who do not have anything to lose, collective action does not even occur as possible. And because the “real” world is a rough and tough place, working precariats view individualistic stoicism, the acceptance of their situation in its unhappiness and omniscent bittersweetness, as the hallmark of maturity and adulthood.

There are the millenial fathers, $16 an hour with three kids. An emergency room visit for his child is the reason he must call out tonight. It is later elaborated that his two year old was suffering from dehydration. Trump-supporting but also honorable, he believes there will be an uprising one day, and sees “the government” killing the population. Was COVID’s release a government plot? Did Trump try to stop something that the government conspired to bring on the population? And are the schools designed to make his children stupid? Do the schools teach his child how to use money, or are they trying to turn his son into a women with their “woke agenda?”

These are the kinds of conversations we have during the lull periods, however rare they are. This is “the rightwing” working class person, not a zealous, fascist who hates blacks and women and wants to live under a dictator. This is someone who thinks about things and knows Something’s fucked, but ultimately they’re alone. And whatever truth they find, they find alone. Hence a lot of “conspiracy” and commentary about “conspiracy theory” misses the mark in quite an important way when its proliferation is described as having to do with irrationality and emotional drive.

It also has to do with the fact that it’s the explanation that pops up and piques interest to a person who has the sense that they are alone in thinking about how they’re constantly getting ripped off somehow.

There are grades of “rightwing” conspiracy, and the idea that the government released COVID as a means of overpopulation control is one of the more sympathetic conspiracies that I’ve heard. In fact I think it is just about as sympathetic, in the universe of conspiracy theories, as the anti-war left’s “Bush did 9/11” assertions. Like any conspiracy, there is some mixup of genuine facts and over-reaching speculations. While at times it is important to argue factual history against speculative assertions, there are some constructive things to say about conversations that veer toward conspiratorial talk — whether rightwing or leftwing.

There are more than “grains of truth” often, in a lot of conspiratorial claims. And the “emotional drive” that a lot of liberal rationalists like to dismiss is really, in essence, a genuine desire to get people to see something about what is happening to our world, that people in power are plotting shit and it’s going to hurt millions of people, including their wife and child. As activists and radical analysts, we’re literally driven by the same kind of desire, even if our method and style of argumentation is rooted in either more rigorous or more tempered methods of reasoning and research.

But everyone, in my opinion, should acknowledge the value of the political conspiracy theorist. Like us, there is a desire that a powerful group be overthrown, and the world be freed. And rather than trying to “correct” the conspiratorial mind, I believe the remedy is done by, at the very least, first giving credit to the instinctual perceptiveness of a person willing to admit that “something” slick is going on.

In a lot of ways it’s a more imaginatively recreational route that leads people to the same exact conclusions as the most rigorous social theorists out there — that there is a powerful group of people who control the world, and they are not driven in any way to care about the consequences of their actions. And that lack of care will lead to human extinction if we don’t do anything about it.

I think that is something that any communist or anarchist, socialist or class-conscious liberal should be willing to work with.

Where the system’s failures are more plainly stated in the grievance of the beggar, the particular misunderstandings that arise in the mind of the conspiracy theorist are where the activist and revolutionary bears the most responsibility. That we cannot give them clarity is our fault and not the government’s.

I think it does well to challenge a lot of our own rigidity in everything we do know because this is what we all spend our lives thinking about. What I mean to say is, does it even do well to say “transphobia” to a man who’s problems include a complete lack of air conditioning, and a dehydrated child, his father’s bills eating up half of his paycheck every week…let us not try to “educate” someone like this about the transphobic aspects of their outlook on public schools. Let us not even indulge a smirk at his suggestion that the woke agenda is at play and will hurt his child and make him stupid and weak.

Schools do make a lot of children feel stupid, woke agenda or not. He is right that, again, our system has failed him. He is also right that, because of his income being “just this amount of poor,” his wife getting $50 dollars a month for food stamps means that the government “doesn’t really do shit” for his family.

I believe these kinds of conversations with the “rightwing” working class are far more general than my own “eccentric” experience.

In the case of our own particular staff, two both side-gig as club bouncers in D.C. on the weekends. And there are the boomers of forgotten glory, some fallen from on high after the crash of 2008, going on 60 and somehow they’re here with us. Another, a grandmother, who nevertheless is there for her daughter’s daughter. And the car mechanic by-day, moonlighting with us and is beloved by the whole of the community that comes through. He is the precariat sage, father of a beautiful handful, conqueror of addiction, and proud of his Navajo blood. I will never forget his story upon our first night working together, being passed the peace pipe in a ceremony lead by his grandfather.

Each person is “locally famous” in their own way.

Somehow there is me, here.

I work in kitchens because I feel I owe them a karmic debt, in what they’ve given me. More than university knowledge and in some ways greater community than even the most sincere religious congregations — here are the masses, fighting for their lives. Here is the place where, stories of impossible circumstances are gathered, and each has a reason to live, and each has some honor, some regrets, some great love, and some strongly held opinions.

I work as a nightshifter, and do double-shifts, from 10 PM to 2 PM, to get my whole 40 hours in, and devote the rest of my time to the work that matters most to me. I have to admit I am rather proud of myself, as the managers did not know that I had cerebral palsy in my right leg until this past weekend when I told them. For me as someone who is prone to self-deprecation and coping with life through means of chipper self-dismissal, this is a moment of genuine pride. The night shift’s regular audiences during the weekends are many, as we are open 24 hours — so the Friday and Saturday bar-rush, as well as post-party swarms, looking for a bite to eat.

Even though our deli is built specifically in the area of the projects, my wage is good enough to pay rent and spend a little for genuine enjoyment. Somehow I am here, and for some reason customers and co-workers like me. And for some reason I don’t mind talking back to the managers and handing out free food in front of them. What’s going to happen? Am I going to lose my job?

Perhaps the most interesting thing about the workplace is that there is, to my mind, some degree of racial segregation. Every black coworker thinks the manager sucks because he’s white. And he thinks the customers suck in general, but not because they’re poor or black, but because every time something goes wrong with an order they call him a racist and those diatribes go on sometimes for a whole quarter-hour. And after so much exposure to customers who regularly come in drunk, or on PCP, or he’s getting robbed, or whatever, who wouldn’t become cynical?

There’s no doubt that literally everyone is racist here though. The Christian grandma hates the Jewish boomer who works the night shift, and thinks he is lazy because he’s Jewish. He himself is a raging zionist who thinks that HAMAS is just one part of a general pattern where everyone blames everything bad that happens on the Jews.

And there’s a lot of that one-uppanmanship and social outcasting if someone doesn’t have the credit of having been shot at, if they’re not hood-life knowledgeable.

Somehow I am not in-or-out of cast. I am there, and people open up to me about fatherhood, poverty, addiction. There’s a lot of talk about past romances, and sex, and the deaths of friends, and hating their parents because of abuse, alcoholism, abandonment, or that they’re always asking for money.

Frustrations of these kinds, I think, are the common lot, not just a part of precariat life. But there is something funny about the rugged individual precariat, in their opennesss and willingness to share their troubles and their anguish.

I wish it so, as a matter of fact, that middle class folk did not have such a hard time opening up as my co-workers are able to. Maybe that is why the activist currents have not really made in-roads in prioritizing this kind of problem, it turns out that moderate material privilege makes trust and vulnerability more difficult and entitles you to choose never to open up about things that should be naturally a part of sharing as talking about the weather.

But I believe that every person I’ve met at this little 24 hour deli is as intelligent and capable as every friend I’ve known with good money, and careers and problems related to inheritance.

So this is a short and sweet suggestion that we should probably be less reflexive in our naming of every kind of difficult-to-hear thing as “trauma-dumping.” It’s insulting, and infantalizing, that people cannot have some modest degree of patience to hear about hardships. And it makes little sense to me that we reserve that kind of attention for exceptionally close friends.

I believe that holding a standard of dignity requires a more generalized willingness to listen to people. And I hope that organizers hoping to reach the masses will adopt the same attitude.

I have, so far, no social theory of a revolutionized precariat.

I do not know if there is any way that progressive organizations could invite these forgotten masses whose story is — that they work to the bone, have this job-and-some other, and still only scrape by.

The precariat class is a class of people who deserve love in-spite of any kind of self-sabotaging fault. Many of them with stories of prison and a good deal of them with problems drinking on the job. Each who tells me their story of this or that court-related problem because of a domestic threat between their son and his girlfriend, or working this job at 15/hr and having 5 kids…I think a good handful are basically illiterate.

But the fact that they show up to work, and manage to tolerate each other, to talk and hash out difficulties, the fact that I can see each person here capable of working as a whole and overcoming the tendency we all have, to want to step on each other’s shoulders in a desire to get ahead, blaming some other employee for an unattended trash heap, or snitching about free food (there’s a “monetary reward” for each reported snitch, a new policy)…the fact that everyone breaks a few rules and there is still a sense of some genuine love, appreciation and relationship is a miracle that calls into question how any of us possessing university education and material security could struggle with “motivation.” The willpower of the precariat to continue in its struggle for survival should humble and to some extent even elicit shame to those great many activists who “worry” about “burnout.”

One of the only consistently peaceful presences is the cashier who comes in, in the morning. A mother in her early sixties, though she sometimes looks no older than 35. She is from Pakistan, and shows up a half hour late, as she is Muslim and commits herself to morning prayers daily…

She has been there for five years and does not ask for a raise. And I’ve never seen her upset. And she does her job the best, and no one attempts to steal or insult her. I do not know why but, even as easy for me as it is to navigate conflicts with customers and between staff, I can’t really keep my own shyness from surfacing when she arrives in the morning and I am getting off my last night shift of the weekend. Saying hello and little more is all that happens. It’s simply the changing of the guard.

But I do know that if someone like that continuously makes time for her kids every week, and finds the way to visit her home country for a few months every year, that, after five years, no other prospective employee has displaced her — that we ought to have it in us to at least do the first thing we do, as revolutionaries, and decide, forever and wholeheartedly toward an attitude of non-compromise in how we aim to change the world.

My friends, let us not forget that we are here to bring meaning and validation to the immense hope that is associated with the word “revolution.” Revolutionary visions will come up against the worst things, but we should never loosen our grip on what we’re here to do. We’re here to bring revolution to this country and the world.

This moment in the United States has presented us with a great deal of challenge. The sense of chronic devastation is palpable on the best of days. And there is no doubt that the imminent rise of religious authoritiarianism in the U.S., zealous in its fetishizing of apocalypse, second-classing of women, strengthening of homophobia, and howling support of military force, reduces all usual assertions that we “stay optimistic” or “keep the faith” to paltry. Those things are rightly dismissed as platitude.

But I will say that, in-spite of my own failure so far to see a way forward in developing a new politics of precariat radicalism, the fact that anyone keeps with the business of living at all, is itself demonstrative of courage and power. It is a testament to humanity itself as the first cause we find worth fighting for. Maybe for now, that should be enough for us.

To continue in our fight to give dignity and peace to all of human kind is factually the correct decision.

It is a matter of fact.

---