When the discussion of the Bourgeoisie comes up, many will attempt to excuse certain elements of it under the assumption that they are harmless due to their size or origin. I’m referring specifically to the petit bourgeois, or the small capitalist class. This class is made up of the owners of small businesses, those that supposedly barely break even compared to the billionaires at the apex of the bourgeois class. This subclass of the bourgeoisie is often shown as the epitome of the capitalist dream, but oftentimes the members of it are one bad check away from becoming their worst fear, a worker. It’s this position in the greater scheme of capitalism that encourages the petit bourgeois to act out in some of the most reactionary ways.

Firstly, let’s break down what makes these bourgeoisie “petit”. The petit bourgeoisie is composed of those who still own their own means of generating wealth, but live in a precarious situation that sees them constantly afraid of losing their capital to a myriad of things, such as debt, labor action, or incompetence. The fear of failure tends to place the members of the petit bourgeoisie into a state of constant panic, and that panic is often directed by the more successful bourgeoisie to coerce the petit bourgeoisie to act in the name of reactionary politics.

But why is the Petit Bourgeoisie so easy to lead into supporting right-wing, often fascist policies? Simply put, they have the most to lose in any immediate change in favor of the working class. If there were to be a revolution, they would lose their businesses first, and would be relegated to being one of the masses, a worker without any means to exploit their fellow laborer. In such individualist societies as America and Great Britain, this is a loss that the petit bourgeois cannot stand. The petit bourgeoisie knows this, and so they are driven to support the larger, more successful bourgeois elements in the hopes that they would be shielded from the proletariat.

This fear of the proletariat causes the petit bourgeoisie to rally behind forces that generally harm them as well, both as people and capitalists. Right wing policies, especially the fascist ones we have seen both historically and now, are designed to benefit only the top of the bourgeoisie. Policies, such as state collaboration with the corporate community of a country, only serve to entrench the largest actors in the economy. While small business owners may think these collaborationist policies can benefit them, they are often left to flounder while the largest corporations are given the vast majority of contracts, favors, and support. The small mom and pop shops, even after the fascist takeover, will struggle to make do, and with that struggle only comes a reinforcement of their precarious state. The smallest owners will become the fiercest defenders of the fascist regime, since they ultimately require it to keep labor movements from upending the whole system of exploitation, but they reap further no benefit from the regime.

As Marxists, however, we must recognize the origins of this sentiment and propensity towards fascism. The attitude of the petit bourgeois stems directly from the economic myth of the self made entrepreneur. It stems from the same attitude that gives way to the phrase “pick yourself up by your bootstraps” which, by its nature, is an impossible task. The self made myth states that the entrepreneurial class have built their fortunes, or in the case of the petit bourgeoisie, their measly hoards, with no assistance. This disregards both concrete advantages they might have had, as well as any advantages offered to them by their identity-to say nothing of the ways that these capitalists universally take advantage of the products of public investment Or the labor of the working class which they employ. Scratch any self-made entrepreneur, even the likes of Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos, and people will find out how much they relied on initial investments or useful personal connections from their family.

 Even the stereotypical HVAC company owner stands on the same social support, though obviously to a lesser extent. Without the influx of cash, whether from a family member, themselves through generational wealth, savings (which implies the financial stability to save in between pay periods), or a loan, the entrepreneurial class would have no means to start their businesses. They would be forced to, just like the vast majority of the world, work for someone else to secure their livelihood. This is why there is no “self made” member of the bourgeoisie, as there’s an entire network of support for them that the working class lacks the means to leverage entirely.

The petit bourgeois is truly in the best position for reactionary politics to take over their psyche. Their desire for profits paired with their inability to truly obtain the levels of capital the wider bourgeois class has leaves them always wanting more. That desire isn’t unique to the petit bourgeois, but it is intensified by a real lack of resources to sustain their exploitation. They are the strongest supporters of fascism solely because, in their minds, there is no one else to turn to in order to maintain their exploitative position over the workers.