[lbo-talk] Re: woj and America

Mike Ballard swillsqueal at yahoo.com.au
Fri May 9 20:29:40 PDT 2003


--- joanna bujes <joanna.bujes at sun.com> wrote:
> At 07:14 AM 05/08/2003 -0700, Mike B wrote:
> >The core question, IMO, is *why* does the working
> >class NOT respond to the many and varied messages
> >which it has received over the years to revolt and
> >establish their own rule?
> >
> >And further, HOW do we break through this
> >psychological armour?
[snip]


> I guess I'm arguing that the various
identification processeses that
> start in childhood continue throughout one's life.
When you're "grown up"
> you identify with the capitalists instead of
identifying with your parents.
> (it's an absurd identification; their interests are
completely counter to
> each other but....) . . .
Gail Brock <gbrock_dca at yahoo.com> observed:

Most humans appear to be quite hierarchical -- I think it is socialization by the early childhood experience of dependency rather than any genetic inheritance. ******************************************************

I'm convinced that this is true too.

********

Nonetheless, among the many consequences, two stand out: 1) Judgment of leaders by their perceived inherited and/or cultural status, and by their own commitment to hierarchy. Thus, whatever Carter or Clinton did, many of those most committed to hierarchy felt that they were illegitimately in a place higher than they should have been. Charges of incompetence or dishonesty stuck and created enormous emotional investment for Carter's and Clinton's dismissal. Bush, and Reagan before him, are perceived as legitimate alphas because of their status and their embrace of inequality. What they have to offer is a kind of derived status as they flatter their followers (the nicknames, the regal joshing). As long as this flattery continues, a lot of people will resist criticism of the leaders who so reassure them. *****************************

IMO, the two C-boys were also part of the capitalist hire-arky. To be sure, they were also kinder and gentler than their Repubican counterparts.

*******

2) Fear/anger at the prospect of losing one's own hierarchical advantages. Being male, belonging to the dominant ethnic group, belonging to the dominant religious group -- these do carry economic, cultural, and personal benefits. *******************************************************

I agree. Power is what it is about. You can be realistic and identify with the dominant powers and perhaps dominate others yourself i.e. get some of their power to rub off on you by being a good dog.

That's a cogent observation of reality. The point is to change it--to get out of what amounts to our sado-masochistic relationship with the ruling class. We need to find ways and means of breaking through, of "fanning the flames" of our own instincts for freedom, which are hard-wired and, at least for most of us, lay like burning embers in our beings.

For the works! Mike B)

===== ***************************************************************** "Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy."

Benjamin Franklin

http://profiles.yahoo.com/swillsqueal

__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list