>>and all this happens simply by verbalizing it, right? you just tell people
>>the truth of their condition and --voila!--revolution.this is what I never
>>get about Carrol's position.
Ok, I thought you were saying that simply talking to people wasn't enough.
What did you mean?
>as I explained, that _is_ class analysis.
Your words here:
>>there's people's _subjective_ perception, but as Marx showed, there is
>>also a way to look at the issue of _classes_ that really does have to do
>>with relation to the means of production.
suggested to me you were putting subjective perception and class analysis on the same plane.
I see I must have been mistaken, so what did you mean?
>>>Even Marx didn't say it was simply as either you either own them or you
>>>don't.
>>
>>But he did get into false consciousness (of the actual state of affairs)
>>at some point, and that does have something to do with this discussion.
>But? Again, you write as if the two approaches contradict one another.
Don't they? I'd be interested to read how they don't.
>>Trick is to do this without getting snobby, lecturing, hectoring, etc.
>good luck with that. ping me if you need any advice.
>>And plenty of people (never mind lefties) need more work on this skill.
>anytime, anywhere. just ping me! LOL
Sorry, but you misunderstand me here. I think you took my words as a personal insult when none was intended.
Todd