> To me "relations of production" has a rather specific meaning
> - -- it refers to those relations which, under given historical
> conditions, define class.
Agreed. The reference to dolphins was flippant, since its unlikely that they are capable of class consciousness, to say the least.
> This is one of the reasons the widespread use
> of "middle class" bothers me: it simply does not answer to capitalist
> relations of production.
True.
> "Middle class" (and especially
> the silly term "upper middlle class") collapses class into mere
> stratification, with an endless (and more or less pointless) series of
> differentia.
Well the capitalist class(es) do have in common an interest in preserving their mode of production as a whole, but apart from that ... I really don't think we lose anything by talking about two primary classes, along with some minor exceptions and a number of sub-strata _within_ those primary classes.
Regards,
Grant.