Mike Ballard wrote:
>
no mention of organising workers as a class
In this context, of organizing as a class, how does one define "working class"? I always have the feeling when I come across references to "the workers," etc. that probably the writer has an image in his/her head, that harks bvack a half century or so and has no particular grip on current actuality.
Most workers today are _not_ blue collar. So what are the "signs" of calss that one can organize around?
At a highly abstract level of _capitalism_ as such it is easy to define _working class_ and essential to do so. But at a practical level of organizing struggle it is probably not relevant.
Carrol