Marx and Engels mention a class “below” the proletariat called the lumpenproletariat, which i understand as meaning a class that has no class consciousness, and is therefore susceptible to the influence of the bourgeoisie. but i don’t see the difference between that and the proletariat proper. don’t the proletariat receive propaganda to suppress their own class consciousness, and don’t they have to be woken up? i don’t get why the lumpenproletariat supposedly can’t be woken up in the same way. besides, some examples of the lumpenproletariat given are people in organized crime, sex workers, and the unemployed. i find it hypocritical to condemn a class of people based on what they do to survive in a capitalist society (or in the case of the unemployed, the fact that the bourgeoisie won’t give them a job). but more than anything, i’m just thoroughly confused by this concept. i feel like i’m missing something major.
Yes, though I don’t think that was a moral judgment of them so much as a description. Marxists are generally amoral—not to be confused with immoral. (I recently posted a video on amorality in c/philosophy.)
I’m not qualified to say whether Marx & Engels were right about them not being very useful in the revolutionary struggle. Perhaps the historical record of successful communist revolutions can show us. I also don’t know whether their analysis of lumpenproletariat in their place during their time would necessarily map perfectly to our place in our time. For instance, sex workers in the modern day… it kind of depends on which country we’re talking about.