>I know that human agency isn't your strong point, but how do you
>expect to develop a class-based politics if people are filled with
>mystifications about the class nature of the society they belong to?
You might be overstating it somewhat there. If people are claiming to be "middle-class", then that is surely a tacit acknowledgement that the society they live in is a class society. Look on the bright side (as the fictional Brian put it) how much worse would it be if people had the notion that they lived in a classless society?
Of course, objectively, there is no such thing as "middle-class" in the US or other modern capitalist societies today. There are only two classes, the working class and the capitalist class. The capitalist class live from exploiting the labour of others and the working class live by being exploited.
> This isn't a matter of "agitational slogans," and since it's an
>attempt to take seriously the role of social psychology in politics
>it's hardly anti-theoretical. If a lot of people shy away from the
>term "working class," don't you think you've got a problem on your
>hands?
If people avoid the term "working class", it may be that they believe they have some relative economic security within the system. So that identifying oneself as "middle-class" indicates merely that one distinguishes oneself from those members of the working class who live in abject poverty and insecurity.
Anyhow, it need not be that serious a problem for the socialist. Simply drop the propaganda about the working class seizing power and emphasise instead that the socialist ideal is to abolish class distinction completely. (This is more accurate anyhow.) Those people who claim to be middle-class must by implication be aware that there is a more privileged class, we can also assume that they personally aspire to enjoying equal privileges.
There's two possible strategies to achieving that aspiration. Join the capitalist class, or abolish the capitalist class. It doesn't really matter, from that approach, precisely how people analyse class, what really matters in the final analysis is which strategy they think is most likely to be effective. Right now, I seem to have more chance of attaining equal privileges with the capitalist class by joining them than by abolishing them. All I need is for one of those lottery tickets that people occasionally buy me as a present to come good. ;-)
The socialist revolution appears more of a long-shot. Just by way of illustration, what do you think is a more socially-acceptable sort of present, a lottery ticket or a subscription to the Industrial Workers of the World? We all know the answer to that. We'll know when the odds have shifted, when the gift of a membership of a socialist organisation becomes more fashionable than the gift of a lottery ticket maybe.
Another thing to keep in mind, a positive spin you might say, is that the middle-class has historically been the most revolutionary class. They wanted what their masters had. The capitalist class, when it was the middle class under feudalism proves that point. Calling yourself "middle-class" doesn't indicate you are content.
The problem is that a middle-class revolution is always a revolution that seeks to take over the reigns of power and become a new ruling class. As distinct from a socialist revolution which has no choice but to abolish class distinctions entirely, there being no lower class over which they could rule. Belief in the existence of a middle-class clouds that crucial distinction between earlier revolutions and the aspirations of socialist revolutionaries. So we need to continue to make the point. But we need not mistake the misunderstanding for a passion among the self-identifying "middle-class" to retain their status quo. Or a satisfaction with being a (or THE) subject class.
> Or are you just waiting for that sudden, inexplicable,
>never-to-be-rushed lightning moment of enlightenment?
Clearly we're not. We're actively taking steps to hasten that enlightenment, by using this excuse to clarify the nature of class. Even at the risk, so you say, of getting a punch in the nose for our troubles. What more can we do?
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas