lbo-talk-digest V1 #3591

[Max Sawicky]

. . .
There are good arguments on both the Piven and Cloward and Texeira sides of
this debate, and I would not dismiss either position in its entirety. It is
also worth noting that their analyses here are not unconnected to how they
see the left building itself up electorally -- Piven and Cloward generally
look to the non-voter, to poor people, while Texiera looks more to the
white,
male worker, who is not absent from the electoral process at the same rate.
Neither are entirely disinterested in how they analyze the problem. . . .

You are making an inference about Ruy's politics which
is inaccurate.  He's a friend of mine, so anyone can
take that any way they like.  (correct spelling:
Teixeira.  He's of Portuguese extraction, fyi.)

For Ruy the attention to white workers serves the purpose
of forming a complete notion of class.  It's not that
he sees them as some crucial vanguard of change in and
of themselves.  They are conspicuously absent from
Democratic voting rolls, but that goes to the Democrats'
failure to address class.  Ruy's point is that the
Dems have traded white workers for "suburbanites,"
and pocketbook class issues for their stands, such
as they are, on things like choice, gun control, and
affirmative action.  I think there's a lot to this,
as could be gleaned from my posts.

Ruy is pretty data-driven.  I don't believe his
results are biased by his preconceptions.

mbs