The thing is, most people don’t form identity around shared class interests. That’s what the Marxists realized in the 20th century when the international, proletarian revolution never fully materialized. Most people from identity around shared culture, shared language, shared traditions, beliefs, history, etc. It’s not that class antagonism doesn’t exist or doesn’t matter - it does - but it matters within a cultural/national context, and it’s only within that cultural/national context that class conflicts can be resolved.
Edit: I want to clarify what I mean when I say that “most people don’t form identity around shared class interests.” I mean class interests in the Marxian sense, ie, ownership of the means of production. In Marxian theory, a person is a member of the capitalist class if they own the means of production, and they are working class if they do not own the means of production. Most people do not form a class identity around ownership or non-ownership of the means of production, but that doesn’t mean that people don’t form a class identity. They do. But, that identity is formed around cultural markers that define their class, within their broader, national/ethnic culture. For instance, an ethnically White person in the US might identify as working or upper class based on their job, the neighborhood they live in, the car they drive, the clothes they wear, the schools they attended, etc. So, nations/ethnicities are defined by shared culture, language, history, beliefs, etc, but within that that there are also class distinctions, but they are also cultural.
It is here that people in the upper classes can use this to their advantage, by trying to stoke conflict between nations/ethnic groups, in an effort to deflect away from class conflicts. That is true, but that doesn’t mean that different nations of people aren’t actually distinct from one another, in the ways that I’ve already outlined (culture, language, traditions, etc).
This reality is especially confusing in the US, because the US is an empire masquerading as a nation. But empires are not nations. The US had been able to maintain the appearance of a nation for sometime through establishment of a violent, White hegemony. The national identity of the US was maintained through violent repression of all non-White ethnic groups. That White hegemony has been getting consistently weaker, however, since about the mid part of the 20th century, and with it the idea of a single, US national identity. And that is where we are today.
The US is a manufactured culture war distracting people from what should be a class war.
The thing is, most people don’t form identity around shared class interests. That’s what the Marxists realized in the 20th century when the international, proletarian revolution never fully materialized. Most people from identity around shared culture, shared language, shared traditions, beliefs, history, etc. It’s not that class antagonism doesn’t exist or doesn’t matter - it does - but it matters within a cultural/national context, and it’s only within that cultural/national context that class conflicts can be resolved.
Edit: I want to clarify what I mean when I say that “most people don’t form identity around shared class interests.” I mean class interests in the Marxian sense, ie, ownership of the means of production. In Marxian theory, a person is a member of the capitalist class if they own the means of production, and they are working class if they do not own the means of production. Most people do not form a class identity around ownership or non-ownership of the means of production, but that doesn’t mean that people don’t form a class identity. They do. But, that identity is formed around cultural markers that define their class, within their broader, national/ethnic culture. For instance, an ethnically White person in the US might identify as working or upper class based on their job, the neighborhood they live in, the car they drive, the clothes they wear, the schools they attended, etc. So, nations/ethnicities are defined by shared culture, language, history, beliefs, etc, but within that that there are also class distinctions, but they are also cultural.
It is here that people in the upper classes can use this to their advantage, by trying to stoke conflict between nations/ethnic groups, in an effort to deflect away from class conflicts. That is true, but that doesn’t mean that different nations of people aren’t actually distinct from one another, in the ways that I’ve already outlined (culture, language, traditions, etc).
This reality is especially confusing in the US, because the US is an empire masquerading as a nation. But empires are not nations. The US had been able to maintain the appearance of a nation for sometime through establishment of a violent, White hegemony. The national identity of the US was maintained through violent repression of all non-White ethnic groups. That White hegemony has been getting consistently weaker, however, since about the mid part of the 20th century, and with it the idea of a single, US national identity. And that is where we are today.