[lbo-talk] Where is class struggle?

[brad bauerly]

>
>
> I'm beginning to see one possible reason I have found brad's posts
> unintelligible. He seems to be writing _as a student_,  with the resutt
> that when he says "class struggle" he _means_ WTITING about class
> struggle. When he says "gender," he means WRITING  about gender. That
> is, he seems to have never been involved in actual political practice,
>
That's pretty fucking ironic, you find my posts unintelligible.  If you mean
I write as a student of life, of struggle, of revolutionary movements, then
yes, I am a student.  If you mean I write like I am disengaged from actual
political practice because I take classes and engage in theoretical
classroom debates, then no, I am not a student.  I really don't understand
how anyone could ever not be involved in 'actual political practice' or
class stuggle, as opposed to narrowly defined political engagement (and yes,
I most certainly have been involved in it, probably too much of it rather
than too little).


>
> I would tentatively suggest that Class Struggle as visible Class Struggle
> NEVER
> OCCURS (except perhaps in an Insurrection , and not always even then).
> The visible struggle is ALWAYS about something else; that is why it
> takes analysis to identify what the struggle is, who are the
> participants, etc.
>
> I would  like to see Brad give an example of what he means by class
> struggle, and how we can recognize it when it occurs.
>
> Class struggle is all around us (I think I already stated this to you in a
prior post).  I have no idea what you mean by 'visible class struggle'?  Do
you mean bosses and workers in fisticuffs? Or, storming the winter palace?
If so, then yes, it is a very rare event.


>  And  the barrier to recognizing either a Revolution or Class Struggle when
> it is occurring
> is some form of dogmaism, some abstract theory in the head of whatr Real
> Revolution is or what Real Class Struggle is. And the actuality never
> fits the abstract patternor model. Brad cannot see that actual class
> struggle will always involve protagonists that don't look like either
> party to the struggle.
>
They won't look like men in top hats smoking cigars and coal covered
muscle-bound workers.  Oh shit, I have been looking for the wrong
protagonists.


>
>  But _politically_ one must see races as fragmentations of the class (Merit
> pay is one of the most aggressive forms of racialization.) Most _real_
> class struggle then pits workers against workers as they strive to unity
> the class, crushing false divisions.
>
> The 'strive to unity' you talk of is formed in the struggle against the
opposing class, not by battling it out amongst ourselves.  There is no
internal workering class class struggle.  That is sectarian nonsense.  There
is no correct line!!


>
> P.S. During periods of low level in the class struggle, the most common
> form dogmatism takes is among those who either insists they have a
> scenario for a true revolution  and those who demand such a scenario.
>
Which is what you are doing!

Brad