Anarchism is not a popular movement precisely because the vast majority of both 'workerist' and 'lifestyleist' anarchists come from relatively privileged backgrounds, are of the educated middle class, and simply can't relate to the the experiences of working class people, nor do they wish to. A paternalistic attitude prevails where any real sense of common cause is lacking.-------
Your impression is correct but ideological anarchism is just as detached, as isolate, and ultimately as elitist as is the lifestyleist sort.
I'll have to take your word for it, at least in terms of class backgrounds, since I don't actually have any contact with the self-identified "anarchist movement" and that type of thing is something that you have to have personal interaction with "the movement" to get an impression of. When it comes to attitude though, I don't detect a lot of paternalism or elitism among the class struggle wing of anarchism, except some annoying disdain for anyone who doesn't understand complex rhetoric or know the specialized lexicon they use. (definitely a problem)
Develop a language and a rhetorical style that is free of jawbreakers and focuses on the fundamental concepts while tapping in to people's frustrations and hopes. If you are a middle class collegiate, you will find this difficult, because most working class people will 'wish they had your problems'. Develop forums in the real world, films, presentations, that focus on the working class struggles in your area's history. Involve people on an emotional level.
This sounds pretty sensible.
Marx actually explains it well: when the petit-bourgeious find themselves being proletarianized, they make fake alliances with the working class in order to protect their interests. Middle class kids feel they are being 'proletarianized' when daddy doesnt buy them the car they want, or their credit card bills get out of hand.And Anarchism is the fake alliance with the sexiest brand name. These are the same people who believe that 'in a socialist society, it will be ok if some people have more wealth than others.....'..themselves of course. I'm sure you've heard that sort of bullshit before.
Very few middle to upper middle class kids ever lose their sense of 'entitlement.' That's why you don't see groups like the IWW organizing many factories or fields anymore because a bunch of faux-radical college kids aren't going to salt in a workplace that will pay them so poorly, after all, that work has to be left to uneducated people. It's kind of like diehard Republican youth who support the war but when asked why they didn't volunteer...they claim that they are 'overqualified'. It is exactly the same thing in fact, if not more cowardly. Which is why syndicalism will fail, because these kids can't come anywhere near getting a foothold in essential industries.
Actually, I think the reason the IWW isn't organizing "factories and fields" anymore is because that kind of work is the minority in the US and the few working class people who still have factory jobs tend to make a very decent living thanks to over a century of struggle in that area. It actually makes more sense to organize service sector workers, as they are paid worse and largely unorganized. I guarantee you that someone working at Sears makes less then someone in a factory.
I assume you don't regard Andrew Carnegie working class despite his impoverished background? If that's true why would you regard someone formerly "middle class" (whatever that means) who has fallen to the level of working class differently then someone born into poverty? People can and do fall from the middle class. It's happening more and more (read Barbara Ehrenreich’s "Bait And Switched" for a well written account of white collar unemployment and downward mobility.)
Anyway, define what you mean by “middle class”. I was under the impression that it didn’t exist. Plenty of working people call themselves middle class and maintain a middle class image as a status symbol.
Shock'em, get 'em sexy!
Can comment on articles and discussions
No, I have absolutely no beef with poor kids who go to community college to get some skills and make a better life. I just have no pity for middle class kids who can't cash in on their degrees, honestly, in historical terms, the shrinking of the middle class is a good thing. I merely question the motives and the longevity of such creatures when it comes to revolutionary activity. It would be foolery to do otherwise, history has borne this out a thousand times.