--- Miles Jackson <cqmv at pdx.edu> wrote:
> Doug Henwood wrote:
> > andie nachgeborenen wrote:
> >
> >> I'm not sure that the existence of the ruling
> class
> >> requires agreement on common interests (much less
> >> being right about them), as opposed to, e.g.,
> common
> >> culture, solidarity, broadly shared values,
> simialr
> >> positions wrt to productivea ssets, and the
> like.,
> >> After all, the pre-WWI ruling class had no clue
> and
> >> fairly little agreement aboyr what was in their
> common
> >> interests, but surely constituted a class.
> >
> >
> > The pre-WW I ruling class agitated to created the
> Federal Reserve. It
> > was maybe their formative experience.
> >
> > Doug
> > ___________________________________
> >
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> >
>
> But Justin has a good point here: whether or not
> they consciously
> share interests, the ruling class is the ruling
> class, due to their
> position in the social structure. The only interest
> the ruling class
> must share is accumulating capital. If we're trying
> to understand
> capitalism as a social system, the psychology
> doesn't have to get more
> complicated than that. --Now, if we're interested
> in the psychology
> of members of the ruling class (say, as a person
> might be fascinated
> with cases of obsessive-compulsive disorder or
> dissociative identity
> disorder), that's a quite distinct and different
> research topic.
>
> Miles
>
> Miles
> ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com