This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Bourgeoisie article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 365 days |
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
|
18 June 2007: I'm wondering about this line here: "They eventually allied with the kings in uprooting the feudalist system" It makes no sense, the "kings" did not uproot the feudalist system, in fact Louis XVI was opposed to the revolution and capitalist society.
February 6, 2005 I'm confused about why this is a hard word to define...in coming up with a complex definition, the writers of the page contradict themselves:
Example A: "Bourgeois is a classification used in analyzing human societies to describe a class of people who are in the middle class nobility, whose status or power comes from employment, education, and wealth as opposed to aristocratic origin."
- aristocracy IS nobility. There is not a "contrast" between the two, unless perhaps you're trying to make a distinction using nobility in the moral sense. - middle class nobility? There is no such thing. Middle class is *gasp!* MIDDLE. Not upper.
Example B: Despite the many references to bourgeois meaning anything having to do with privilege, which I presume all stem from the original, and in my opinion, incorrect, Marxist context, the article then refers to bourgeoisie as "merchants and traders." In fact, that _is_ the meaning of the word in both French and English. And, as is probably very obvious, merchants and traders are not, socially speaking, classified as members of the aristocracy/nobility/upper class.
It is my understanding, based on personal education and study, that Americans use the word according to its French usage during the French Revolution. I certainly think there should be something about that time frame and the uprising (overthrowing of the nobility -- which was not done by the nobility!). Also, this usage, both French and American English, significantly predates the work of Marx. Certainly Marx's usage was based on something, and I think it stems from, as Mirriam Webster mentions in their dictionary, the idea that the bourgeois were driven by commercial and industrial interests. This makes sense given their livelihood.
Stblbach, why the revert? The change was correct. The entire article is Marxist theory. I have changed it yet again and made another change to try to make it more neutral. Johnwhunt 19:48, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I have eliminated the word "derisive" based on your comments above. Johnwhunt 23:29, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Went to Google and plowed through the first page of links. All references said it was a Marxist theory term. Are there any other economic theories that use the term? (oh, oh, theories derived from Marxism don't count.) Johnwhunt 21:18, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
From Columbia Encyclopedia in its entirity:
"(brzhwäz´) (KEY) , originally the name for the inhabitants of walled towns in medieval France; as artisans and craftsmen, the bourgeoisie occupied a socioeconomic position between the peasants and the landlords in the countryside. The term was extended to include the middle class of France and subsequently of other nations. The word bourgeois has also long been used to imply an outlook associated with materialism, narrowness, and lack of culture—these characteristics were early satirized by Molière and have continued to be a subject of literary analysis.
From Columbia Encyclopedia in its entirity (cont.)
Within Karl Marx’s theory of class struggle, the bourgeoisie plays a significant role. By overthrowing the feudal system it is seen as an originally progressive force that later becomes a reactionary force as it tries to prevent the ascendency of the proletariat (wage earners) in order to maintain its own position of predominance. Some writers argue that Marx’s theory fails because he did not foresee the rise of a new, expanded middle class of professionals and managers, which, although they are wage earners, do not fit easily into his definition of the proletariat."
So, let me ask again, what other economic theories not related to Marx use the term as shown in the wiki article?
My problem with the article is that it is not a neutral POV and is almost entirely Marxist political theory. That's alright by me if it is properly designated. Which it is not. So by not being neutral and spouting only Marxist theory, the article becomes propaganda, which is another violation of the wiki rules. Johnwhunt 14:39, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Taken from the article "middle class" in Wikipedia: "For Marxist views on this class, compare bourgeoisie. Note that this is not the same thing as middle class." Johnwhunt 17:20, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Well, let me give it a shot and let's go from there. Johnwhunt 20:14, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I have read the NPOV articles and found nothing to indicate the article as written violates that. I would appreciate your guiding me toward the parts you want me to read, perhaps by posting them here for all to see.
I did not reduce the Marxist part of the article because of a dislike of Marxism. I did it because the article is about "Bourgeoisie", not "Marxism". There are significant references to Marxism, Marxist and related theories and writings in the article. The article has five long and two short paraghraphs. Marxism is mentioned in the first (introductory) long paragraph and is the sole subject of two long paragraphs. All of the related topics, the references and the external link are Marxist.
I think it would be easier to argue the article is too Marxist than not Marxist enough.
Also, you stated above that the comments concerning "uprooting" and "values" will almost certainly be deleted. Why? They came from Columbia Encyclopedia in the article I posted above. Johnwhunt 18:40, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
In Marxist theory the class that in contrast to the ptoletariat or wage earning is primatily concerned with property values.
You guys have really bought into this stuff, haven't you? Toe the line, and the next thing you know, you are shocked, suffering in a Koryma prison and wondering what the fuck happened.
When one gets a preview from a linking page you see the flag of Israel as the page image.  I don't see the topic of Israel appearing anywhere on the page. I'm assuming it was some vandal rather than the preview image selection algorithm but I don't know how to change it. Can anyone help? Desiderious Jones ( talk) 16:53, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
The redirect Boujee has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 6 § Boujee until a consensus is reached. Utopes ( talk / cont) 01:52, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Bourgeoisie article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 365 days |
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
|
18 June 2007: I'm wondering about this line here: "They eventually allied with the kings in uprooting the feudalist system" It makes no sense, the "kings" did not uproot the feudalist system, in fact Louis XVI was opposed to the revolution and capitalist society.
February 6, 2005 I'm confused about why this is a hard word to define...in coming up with a complex definition, the writers of the page contradict themselves:
Example A: "Bourgeois is a classification used in analyzing human societies to describe a class of people who are in the middle class nobility, whose status or power comes from employment, education, and wealth as opposed to aristocratic origin."
- aristocracy IS nobility. There is not a "contrast" between the two, unless perhaps you're trying to make a distinction using nobility in the moral sense. - middle class nobility? There is no such thing. Middle class is *gasp!* MIDDLE. Not upper.
Example B: Despite the many references to bourgeois meaning anything having to do with privilege, which I presume all stem from the original, and in my opinion, incorrect, Marxist context, the article then refers to bourgeoisie as "merchants and traders." In fact, that _is_ the meaning of the word in both French and English. And, as is probably very obvious, merchants and traders are not, socially speaking, classified as members of the aristocracy/nobility/upper class.
It is my understanding, based on personal education and study, that Americans use the word according to its French usage during the French Revolution. I certainly think there should be something about that time frame and the uprising (overthrowing of the nobility -- which was not done by the nobility!). Also, this usage, both French and American English, significantly predates the work of Marx. Certainly Marx's usage was based on something, and I think it stems from, as Mirriam Webster mentions in their dictionary, the idea that the bourgeois were driven by commercial and industrial interests. This makes sense given their livelihood.
Stblbach, why the revert? The change was correct. The entire article is Marxist theory. I have changed it yet again and made another change to try to make it more neutral. Johnwhunt 19:48, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I have eliminated the word "derisive" based on your comments above. Johnwhunt 23:29, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Went to Google and plowed through the first page of links. All references said it was a Marxist theory term. Are there any other economic theories that use the term? (oh, oh, theories derived from Marxism don't count.) Johnwhunt 21:18, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
From Columbia Encyclopedia in its entirity:
"(brzhwäz´) (KEY) , originally the name for the inhabitants of walled towns in medieval France; as artisans and craftsmen, the bourgeoisie occupied a socioeconomic position between the peasants and the landlords in the countryside. The term was extended to include the middle class of France and subsequently of other nations. The word bourgeois has also long been used to imply an outlook associated with materialism, narrowness, and lack of culture—these characteristics were early satirized by Molière and have continued to be a subject of literary analysis.
From Columbia Encyclopedia in its entirity (cont.)
Within Karl Marx’s theory of class struggle, the bourgeoisie plays a significant role. By overthrowing the feudal system it is seen as an originally progressive force that later becomes a reactionary force as it tries to prevent the ascendency of the proletariat (wage earners) in order to maintain its own position of predominance. Some writers argue that Marx’s theory fails because he did not foresee the rise of a new, expanded middle class of professionals and managers, which, although they are wage earners, do not fit easily into his definition of the proletariat."
So, let me ask again, what other economic theories not related to Marx use the term as shown in the wiki article?
My problem with the article is that it is not a neutral POV and is almost entirely Marxist political theory. That's alright by me if it is properly designated. Which it is not. So by not being neutral and spouting only Marxist theory, the article becomes propaganda, which is another violation of the wiki rules. Johnwhunt 14:39, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Taken from the article "middle class" in Wikipedia: "For Marxist views on this class, compare bourgeoisie. Note that this is not the same thing as middle class." Johnwhunt 17:20, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Well, let me give it a shot and let's go from there. Johnwhunt 20:14, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I have read the NPOV articles and found nothing to indicate the article as written violates that. I would appreciate your guiding me toward the parts you want me to read, perhaps by posting them here for all to see.
I did not reduce the Marxist part of the article because of a dislike of Marxism. I did it because the article is about "Bourgeoisie", not "Marxism". There are significant references to Marxism, Marxist and related theories and writings in the article. The article has five long and two short paraghraphs. Marxism is mentioned in the first (introductory) long paragraph and is the sole subject of two long paragraphs. All of the related topics, the references and the external link are Marxist.
I think it would be easier to argue the article is too Marxist than not Marxist enough.
Also, you stated above that the comments concerning "uprooting" and "values" will almost certainly be deleted. Why? They came from Columbia Encyclopedia in the article I posted above. Johnwhunt 18:40, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
In Marxist theory the class that in contrast to the ptoletariat or wage earning is primatily concerned with property values.
You guys have really bought into this stuff, haven't you? Toe the line, and the next thing you know, you are shocked, suffering in a Koryma prison and wondering what the fuck happened.
When one gets a preview from a linking page you see the flag of Israel as the page image.  I don't see the topic of Israel appearing anywhere on the page. I'm assuming it was some vandal rather than the preview image selection algorithm but I don't know how to change it. Can anyone help? Desiderious Jones ( talk) 16:53, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
The redirect Boujee has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 6 § Boujee until a consensus is reached. Utopes ( talk / cont) 01:52, 6 October 2023 (UTC)