<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2>In a message dated 8/11/2002 5:54:24 PM Eastern Standard Time, dhenwood@panix.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">>There are three<BR>
>classes in the U.S.<BR>
><BR>
>Capitalists<BR>
>Workers<BR>
>Petty Producers<BR>
><BR>
>The term "middle class" is an infallible giveaway of moralistic or<BR>
>otherwise muddled political thinking.<BR>
<BR>
Feeling rather ex cathedra today, are you?<BR>
<BR>
So where in your schema do you fit self-employed professionals (e.g., <BR>
doctors in private practice, who are now plagued by HMOs, but who <BR>
still don't want to be socialized) or middle managers (who both boss <BR>
and are bossed, and can vacillate between identifying as worker or <BR>
exec)? Some people *are* in the middle in the power sense (and not <BR>
merely the income sense).</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
All of these folks have control over a means of production, whether the commodity is a "good" or a "service". The all have relations with private property whereby capital is produced *for* them and not someone else. The degree may be different but the essential relation is the same.<BR>
<BR>
That is why I prefer the term "petty [or petit] bourgeois". These folks will generally always "side" with the interests of capital.<BR>
<BR>
Best,<BR>
David</FONT></HTML>