Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> >
> My god, Carrol, you can disagree with Kendall without bringing out
> the heavy artillery, can't you?
>
> Maybe not.
>
Actually not. I'm working on a long pen-l post, grounded in Marx & Ollman, responding to what I think is Lou Proyect's desertion of marxism for moralism. I can think of few things as politically destructive as moralism. That old anarchist Bookchin has I believe been engaged in quite a squabble for some years now with such moralistic currents in anarchism. (I forget the term he uses, something like "life-style anarchism" though that isn't it.)
In addition Kendall's kind of moralism is also utterly puritanical in its (implicit) condemnation of laziness. I can think of only two realms where laziness is not a political virtue: political activity proper and household tasks (where matters of male supremacy become important).
Carrol