Horowitz/Reparations for slavery

Dennis Breslin dbreslin at ctol.net
Sat Mar 10 09:43:44 PST 2001


Carrol Cox wrote:
>
> The argument is that "The Working Class" and "Black Working Class" are
> abstractions which contribute to the understanding of and struggle
> against racism in the U.S. while the abstraction "White Working Class"
> blurs the lines and becomes a barrier to clarity and understanding. This
> may be wrong but there is no imaginable set of empirical data that can
> either support or question it.
>

You well know that this is familiar ground we stumbling through here and I think there's a fair amount of incommensurablity at play. Notwithstanding the distinction beween typology and taxonomy, the criteria validating one system of classification, boundaries, etc. _for the most part_ lie entirely within a particular theory. So claims about the existence and actions of and by abstractions such as white working class, white men, whites, men, since they're not necessarily generated by a marxist theory can play no useful theoretical role. And a theory, to a considerable extent generates, its own condition of validity, then these phenom are non-theoretical at best and work contrary to the theory. And I agree that empirical evidence is incapable to justify conceptual distinctions, inasmuch as what counts as evidence is itself implicated in theory. But there are degrees of extreme. Isn't it perhaps useful to recognize that at some concrete level there might be cross-theoretical agreement? Otherwise you've got an entirely closed loop which may well work against your larger project: understand and contribute positively to the struggle against racism in the U.S. Otherwise you or Yoshie are doing what you seem to disklike a lot: the leisurely distractions of the theory class.

Dennis Breslin



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list