Talk:New class

message: "New class" is not a proper term; it is just an expression in a specific context. the article should be renamed. 07:20, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not a term. "Class" is a term, "marxist" is a term, "new something" is just new "something" until it got an individual name. If "new marxists" insist that this is a "new term", then they are brain-damaged. What class will emerge tomorrow? "New 'new class'", "extra-new class"? Mikkalai 01:38, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

text: What theoretical implications? An implication of thin-stretching to make up a theory? Lack of eductation in modern marxists that don't know Greek or Latin language to invent a new term if they feel it is necessary? Mikkalai 01:38, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

text: Please don't make guesses what I may and may not want to do. I only yesterday learned about the usage of this expression, and it struck me as ... er... lacking ingenuity, to say it softly. Thank you for significant contribution to the topic. If the term is indeed in serious use, then I feel pity for the fate of communist theory, that's all.  Just imagine a biologist who discovered a new bug and gave it a fresh, original, memorizable name, "New Bug" (Bugus Novus)... "New Class"; who would have thought! Do they still call it "Scientific Communism"?Mikkalai 04:20, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry Mikkalai, it just felt like polemic (I'm a little touchy today).  On one hand you're right, its an appallingly vague term.  You get people talking about the new class (technocrats), and then someone else talking about the new class (Djilas).  Now Djilas' analysis is plenty scientific; I think he chose an "ordinary language" term to avoid execution, or even longer gaol sentences, and also to try and inspire something like the 1956 Hungarian Revolution but in Yugoslavia.  Personally, much like Karl Marx turned the word capitalist from a vague adjective for owners of capital into a scientific definition, I think Djilas had the opportunity to turn nomenklatura into a scientific term.  Perhaps for english: nomination|capital, nominationalist|capitalist, nominationalism|capitalism.  Of couse, that still gets at the problem: capitalism sustains itself, reproducing a crisis due to its expansion.  The Soviet-style societies (under Djilas) reproduce themselves in a contracted form, and their crisis, rather than being immanent, is continuous. Fifelfoo 04:26, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proper term 

message: John Galbraith also advocated the formation of a "new class" in a western socialist/social democratic context.  Classical liberal and libertarians tended to attack him on that.  I would like to add a section on that. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Amcalabrese (talk • contribs) 02:55, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Galbraith's New Class 

message: I deleted the Star Wars reference at the beginning of the article, which led to a dead link of a not-yet-created Wikipedia article about "New class shipbuilding" in something related to Star Wars. 
An article this important, about one of the most important socio-economic results of the Stalinist communist system, and arguably one of the causes of its downfall, does not need to be demeaned with some movie reference that leads to nothing. 
Nathan Greenhalgh  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.105.149.111 (talk) 07:31, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  star wars 

message: I think the immediately preceding "Star Wars" reference bolsters the case for the creation of a Disambiguation Page for the term "New Class".  Already, there seems to be two distinct, mostly unrelated usages of the term (One pertaining to Communist societies; the other to Western societies, especially the United States).  I myself first came across the term "New Class" in something published in the U.S. from the early 1970s, and it was used exclusively to describe a phenomenon in the United States that the liberal author (I can't remember the name) says began in the U.S. in the years following World War II. and consisted mostly of business middle management; hardly the same thing that most of this article revolves around (Eastern Bloc communism).  I'd do it myself but I don't know how and any attempts by me to do so, with my online clumsiness, would most likely be swiftly deleted. Shanoman (talk) 22:03, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation 

message: I removed the paragraph describing the New Class as paradoxical -- the classless, stateless version of communism is the end goal, it's not what any communist country has achieved yet.  The communist governments that have existed have all been socialist, which is the lower form of communism in the Marxist-Leninist sense.  In this lower form the state still exists as well as potentially other classes, but the proletariat is now on top and in control of the means of production (i.e. state control of industry and collective farms) while working towards the ideal communist society.
Sark6354201 (talk) 20:58, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paradox 

message: A large paragraph was deleted from the top of the article at some point, so that it now starts with a continuation using "also". Context has been lost. 86.159.197.174 (talk) 16:46, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Something is odd here 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on New class. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060813115647/http://theclassofthenew.net/6.html to http://theclassofthenew.net/6.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:41, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: NEW CLASS 27.109.114.56 (talk) 15:28, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  ENGLISH