>> > > Care to school us, Alec?
>> >
>> > That class isn't reducible to two or three reified
>> > labels? That it's a matter of determining
>>specific
>> > relations rather than flattening out complex
>>groups
>> > into overarching categories? I'm not here to
>>"school"
>> > anyone, figuring that would be authoritarian.
Where have people been flattening out these complex groups and insisting their abstraction is the one that most closely matches reality?
>>
>>
>>Cop out of the week. Someone who just wants to
>>interject with "sorry,
>>you're all wrong," yet can't be bothered to explain
>>why, isn't of much
>>use to the discussion.
>
>Not a cop out at all - if anything a charitable
>presumption of reading skills. It maintains an
>inflexible and distorting perspective illusion to
>think of "class struggle" as a struggle between two
>classes - working class and ruling class.
Can you please tell me where I can find a good argument that class struggle, in the abstract, is NOT, ultimately, between two classes. An argument that has stood up to critique by or endorsed by "good", "Marxist", thinkers.
>Or in
>simple terms of oppressor and oppressed, authoritarian
>vs. anti-authoritarian. These theoretical frames
>don't fit a messy reality. A former worker who is
>hired for management doesn't have her consciousness
>instantly and magically changed from "worker" to
>"ruler."
Who said it was?
>Very simple points.
>
>
>Alec
Give people a modicum of credit, Alec, that they understand the existence of real complexity under their theoretical models, even if they don't genuflect in the direction of complexity in their posts.
Todd
_________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx