reading this thread, i'm thinking that dividing the 270 million US people of 2000 into neat "class-oriented" groups ("proletariat" and "capitalist"?) to theorize and organize a party seems academic and naive to me.
Who did that? After that guy!
My main interest in the idea stems from its role as an organizing principle in political argument. It's not a matter of referring to some non-existent sphere of comraderie or making academic arguments.
Unrestrained private ownership of capital gives rise to exploitation (non-technical definition) of individuals in a variety of ways. An appeal to class means making a political issue of these modes of exploitation and their remedies. People are screwed as workers, ripped-off as consumers, frustrated as entrepreneurs, and disempowered as citizens, all because of the power of Capital. To me class is about economic justice -- those that don't enjoy it, because of those who limit it. Us and them; the many and the few. It's not about groups; it's a story with an unfinished ending.
mbs