[lbo-talk] Revolutionary Leadership

[Bill Bartlett]

At 12:49 PM -0500 31/10/07, Carrol Cox wrote:
>Mike Ballard wrote:
>  >
>  > Angelus wrote:
>>
>>  Well, as I've stated before, I have a problem with
>>  communists relating uncritically and positively to the
>>  category of the "working class" to begin with.  A
>>  revolutionary reconstruction of society would involve
>>  the abolition of the working class, not its
>>  emancipation.
>>
>>  ********************
>>
>>  The abolition of the wages system would be both an emancipation from wage
>  > labour and Capital and and the end of class rule.  The working class would
>  > become a free association of producers.
>
>Wait a minute. Angel raises (in radically condensed form but still
>clearly) a major challenge to the Marxist tradition (but not necessarily
>to Marx himself), and you blow it off with repetition of a slogan. Angel
>may be wrong, but the claim should be taken seriously if it is to be
>responded to at all.

Hang on a minute, is Mike actually disputing what Angelus said? That 
wasn't apparent to me. In my opinion, Angelus is not only absolutely 
correct, but I'm startled by the claim that a society which 
eliminates all classes is a "major challenge to the Marxist 
tradition."

However, Mike's statement that "The working class would become a free 
association of producers" might be somewhat ambiguous, but I don't 
disagree with the most obvious interpretation of that either. That 
is, that what was the working class would, in the absence of an 
opposing capitalist class, cease to be a distinct class (not having 
anything to distinguish itself from, this is axiomatic) and 
henceforth people would become free to produce their needs as they 
see fit. Though free co-operation between people.

Bill Bartlett
Bracknell Tas