>
> Right.... if only the serfs had just gone anarchist when met with the
> proposition of owning their own land or wage labor.... what idiots the serfs
> must have been....
The "proposition of owning their own ... wage labor"? If it's wage labor, then the labor is not owned by the laborer; it's the de facto property of the ruling class.
But, assuming you meant "owning their own labor," then how is "going anarchist" at odds with this? Looks like you're arguing with a straw man.
> It is not a matter of "accepting tragedy," or for that matter comedy,
> happiness, etc. It is the necessity of coming up with an analysis of the real
> obstacles that people really face. The "reality" is not a bourgeois universe,
> a la the Oprah Winfrey show, where people can "choose" happiness, if only
> they put their minds to it.
I completely agree with you on this part, even though it does seem possible that some people could be perfectly happy living their lives in (either figurative or literal) chains. This has been problematic for social movements, of course.
Brian