working class civil society (wasRe: Class Ceiling--Ehrenreich)

[kwalker2 at gte.net]

carrol i was simply pointing out that your nearly absolutist claim that no
one argues that positions/analyses aren't marxist or radical enough was
absurd since YOU regularly engage in such a claim, as does Yoshie, as does
charles, as does angela, as does doug, as do I.   if you could for once
actually read what i type you would have seen that:   the "struggles and
wishes of the age"  blah blah i wrote  what was that if not an appeal to
marx  and an implicit claim that my claims were morein line with marx than
yoshie's.  i'm not ashamed or too timid to make that argument.  and i don't
think others are always wrong for deploying it.  HOWEVER, there are times
when it's appropriate.  when it's used as bludgeon to beat newbies over the
head, not such a good thing. when it's used to make diddly squat lint
picking criticisms, sometimes not such a good thing.  i.e., yoshie's
arguments were diddly squat lint pinking arguments about an author writing
for a particular audience.  BE ought to be cut some slack for those pieces.

 harper's is not as marxist journal and she aint' going to get much
published in the way of a marxist/radical viewpoint, is she?

iow, i don't give a bat's eyelash about more marxist than thou arguments.
they're par for the course.  and i am NOT dismissing your arguments because
you use that tactic.   i do, however, think it's absurd to claim that no
one ever does it which is what you typed.  and i especially think it's
absurd becase you & co do a whole helluva lot more than most people.   so
when you wrote:


>I don't think that *anyone* on this list (and certainly no one
>on marxism or leninist-international) has ever advanced "not
>marxist" or "not radical" as an argument. 

i almost wet my pants.  and i really did wet my pants when you told me
offlist that, if anyone does make these arguments, then you never read
them.  and right there that day, doug and chaz were claiming that the
other's arguments weren't marxist.  thank god i stocked up on my supply of
depends that day or i would have ruined another pair of shorts!   

i initially brought it up b/c i knew yoshie would go on about how it wasn't
marxist or radical enough.  okey doke.  but this is an absurd crit to make
of ehrenreich's JOURNALISTIC pieces.  she is not writing to the marxist
enlightenederati.  she is writing for a diff. audience altogether.   you'd
best be glad she's got the ear of someone because it's better than you and
i and what we accopmlish.  and, moreover, it's people like her that bring
people like me and eric and peter and others to this godforsaken list and
to left and marxist politics to begin with.

kelley


>>Final re-emphasis. The point of departure for and central concern
>>of this post is your phrase, "position which you have argued is not
>>marxist or radical enough." That is mere poisoning of the wells of
>>discourse. And I'm really curious. Why is it so important to you to
>>cling to the conviction that the only reason someone could disagree
>>with you was because they thought you "weren't marxist enough."
>>Can't you even contemplate the possibility that they disagree with
>>you because they think you are wrong? Actually, I don't really
>>understand what you mean by ascribing such a position to me or
>>to anyone else.