> Carrol Cox wrote:
>> I suggest you try seriously to demonstrate a moral judgment of anything.
>> You also can't demonstrate that anyone ever first makes a moral judgment
>> then acts on the gbasis of that judgment. You can't separate thought and
>> action that crudely.
>
> How about the "theoretical consciousness" of its "loss" that Marx makes a
> prerequisite for the sucessful emancipatory "action" he claims will
> ultimately issue from the "proletariat"?
>
> "since man has lost himself in the proletariat, yet at the same time has not
> only gained theoretical consciousness of that loss, but through urgent, no
> longer removable, no longer disguisable, absolutely imperative need -- the
> practical expression of necessity -- is driven directly to revolt against
> this inhumanity, it follows that the proletariat can and must emancipate
> itself"
> <http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/holy-family/ch04.htm>
=============================
How is this "work as compulsion" under capitalism not a secularized version of the biblical fall -- "by the sweat of the brow" and all that?
How does the overcomeability of moralese contribute to the overcomeability of labor contracts under contemporary conditions [of way too many weapons in too many hands] or/rather, do we have to overcome legalese a la Pashukanis as well?
Ian