>d-m-c at worldnet.att.net wrote:
>
>>there is no
>>'subject' of revolution that we can locate (the proletariat, the
>>intellectual vanguard, the marginalized)
and doug asked:
>So Kelley, is there really a revolutionary subject after all?
whether this subject exists, isn't i think up for discussion, or not as i see it anyways. the harder question seems to be: does this subject exist prior to struggles, outside of struggles (how we define struggles being then important), and - more directly - is this subject the origin of itself?
how you figure the subject is then dependant on how you might answer these other questions. not an easy thing to do i think.
angela