doug,
after reading the above, whom do you think is dealing with hypotheticals? in the above, without having established (at least onlist) that class struggle is fundamental and thorough-going while other oppressions are special, the hypothetical train rolls on at full steam, suggesting that accusations of racism, homophobia, etc are from some cozy bourgeoisie or are slights associated with political correctness.
so, on the one hand, we have brian's concrete (not hypothetical) example of sexual identity discrimination by the IBEW. otoh, you have the suggestion that labour organizers should be prepared (by which i assume they should be prepared to effective reject) for accusations of such discrimination, such accusations being ones of political correctness.
you will agree, i hope, that this is clearly not a trivial argument about exceptions. at least to me, this is an issue of the framing of the thought (the fundamentals, the axioms as you said) of the left. perhaps this is not the first time this has been addressed. in which case, those seeking privilege for their framework should at least point the rest of us to the arguments for their side (and i am afraid just saying 'people have done this analysis before, for instance, marx' doesn't help much. some text, subsection would be more useful).
without some such examination and understanding, any solidarity on the part of the left would be nothing more than the sticking of yellow ribbons to one's cars. after all, tiger woods [a wholly owned subsidiary of nike inc?] is reputed to have refused to cross a picket line, once.
--ravi