> You wouldn't happen to have been a Maoist in some past life, would you?
Never. Shows how much he ever bothered to read before posting his attacks on me, which detailed my political past and current affiliation, and thereby offended Eric. The part of Alex's post that preceded this excerpt shows how much reflection he gave to his earlier provocations before hurling them. Which, I suspect, is also true of his current posture. This is the Internet's downside. Instead of ruthless criticism in the Marxian meaning, what we get is the unaccountable ruthlessness of the mob.
In truth, the working class comprises individuals who, despite their foibles that interefere with Alex's ability to comprehend their collective wisdom and talent, have repeatedly throughout history managed to rise to the occasion of heroism and sacrifice on behalf of their fellows. These are the very same masses who, in other times and contexts, obeyed priests and generals, tormented the oppressed, and cheered lynchings. Marxian politics consists of facilitating those events that bring out the former aspects while combating the latter, as I wrote (citing Gramsci) in response to Alex's previous bout of nuttiness, not in taking potshots at the human quirks and relatively harmless failings of individual members that provide color and nuance to the class as a whole.
But why would anyone expect Alex to respect any worker any more than he respects any Marxist? If Alex really was shamed into activism in part by our previous exchange, that is a plus. Next, one can hope that immersion among people who struggle collectively will further open his mind.
KL