> I'm tired of leftist homophobia being couched in the sort of rhetorical
> nonsense posted below. Imagine if someone -- because the left did to its
> detriment -- said, let's not talk about the national question (racism) or
> the woman question because it detracts from narrow straight-jacketed
> interpretation of the "class" struggle.
I know that you haven't been on the list very long, which is one reason why I'm refraining from insulting you in similar terms to the name that you've just called me. For the umpteenth time, nobody is saying "let's not talk about _____". What I am saying is not novel, i.e. (1) that the obsession with "identity politics" --- some of which does involve important material issues --- among the leftists of the developed world seems to have alienated the political left from the working class. This appears to be particularly prominent in the US, which (2) also appears to suffer from a dearth of (economic) class conciousness, relative even to other settler societies. And I tend to think that the above two things are related.
> Class struggle is also about the struggle for democracy which includes
> multi-class questions like LGBT rights. Historical materialists understand
> this. Humans aren't simply composed of their relation to capital -- a fact
> that makes democracy, socialism, and communism (ultimately) possible.
Once again, read my last post. My point is about the relative dearth of economic class consciousness, not about pushing some kind of _homo_economicus_ (no pun intended).
> I think there are too many commonly known historical examples where a
> failure to grasp fundamental principles of democracy led to divisions in
the
> class struggle that prevented advances. I think we are looking, in this
post
> by Grant, at a contemporary rationale for it.
No, what you are looking at is the -- fairly logical it seems to me --- suggestion that the class struggle will never succeed as long as the present paucity of (economic) class consciousness continues
> The right uses homophobia to divide our movement. The solution isn't to
> ignore it and demand that super-exploited and oppressed people shut up
about
> it. The solution is the old labor slogan: an injury to one is an injury to
> all.
One more time: nobody is telling anybody to shut up and I think we need just a smidgeon more emphasis on (economic) class interests.
regards,
Grant.