>
>>Race, sex, sexual preference are all tied up with the distribution of
>
> property and the division of labor.
>
> But Doug, you have to actually live life and not just theorize it to
> understand this. But some people are content to be keyboard
> jockeys and opine from the safety of a home office.
This argument is precisely analogous to the claim that a medical doctor could not understand the etiology of a disease unless the doctor personally experienced the disease. Being able to thoroughly analyze a phenomenon and test causal linkages is not dependent on having an immediate "personal" experience. This assumption that a person cannot "know" something unless they personally experience it is one of the most pernicious misconceptions about knowledge that I come across as a college prof.
Miles
>
>
>>And it's a phenomenal fact that people experience their lives
>
> through these "identity" categories. You can tell them all you
> like that it's a delusion, and it's really all about class, but
> you've got to do a lot of analytical and rhetorical work to make
> that clear.
>
> Or maybe build on their actual exprience of these identities so
> that they then expand to an inclusion/creation of a class identity.
>
>
>>And there are a lot of important things that class doesn't really
>
> touch - like the privilege of visiting your sick partner in the ICU.
>
> And because you have been refused entrance, the man whom your
> mother came to call her third son is put on machines he never
> wanted to be on because you were denied access.
>
>
>>I think identity politics marked the end of class struggle -- that
>
> it coopted the legitimate grievances of women and minorities
>
> I always thought being murdered was a legitimate grievance. The
> things you learn on lbo-talk.
>
>
>>I am not sure what there is to get here.
>
>
> The fact that in anti-queer culture, the likelihood of violence against
> queers increases. In fact, if you want to help the elite do its work,
> you oppose efforts to end sexism, racism and anti-queer hatred.
>
>
>>A [genuine] question: what is the basis of solidarity? Surely it is
>
> more than back-scratching?
>
> Why does it have to be more than that? By working to alleviate the
> real life oppression I suffer and my doing the same in return, a great
> of solidarity can be brought about (you have to unattach yourself from
> your keyboard to do so, of course).
>
>
>>They are under the delusion that there is some magic formula which
>
> will instantly revive The Left
>
> It is the desire for some Party Line they can prostrate themselves before
> which I do not see coming back any time soon (maybe never). Pluralism
> looks like a permanent fixture of the future.
>
>
>>more or less deliberately avoiding the fact that criticisms of or policies
>
> for The Left are empty until there is something (probably a loose coalition,
> but an identifiable one) that can be called The Left.
>
> However, The Left re-emerges, I doubt it will be similar to Lefts of the
> past.
> Time to throw the wayback machines on the scrap heap.
>
>
>>Capitalism is possible w/o the oppression of gays, blacks, women and
>
> national minorities
>
> Is it?
>
>
>>but you can't have capitalists or capitalist society w/o workers.
>
>
> Agreed, but you also need scapegoats in capitalism.
>
>
>>I tried to explain this to Rorty, but he remained, as
>
> I told him to his considerable resentment, a vulgar
> "Marxist" to the core, unshakable in his belief that
> all of us are really fairly directly linked in our
> behavior to our economic interests understood in
> pretty narrow terms as wages and benefits.
>
> Throwing reality in Rorty's face? No wonder you were
> offered no roses.
>
>
>>so what do we do with racist homophobic white union activists?
>
> who then is engaging in identity politics at the expense of class
> struggle?
>
> Sing out Louise!
>
> Brian
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>