I can't parse this sentence. What does it mean?
>but that elite liberals and even some Wise- ish leftists don't really give
>a shit about exploitation in the
>Marxist sense. They care about it sometimes in the colloquial sense -
>very low wage workers, which some foundations love - but not in the
>classical Marxist sense.
I, Lenin's Tomb, Eric, Chuck, Alan, Joanna, etc. already know this.
One of the things I used to criticize at the old blog is the Criticial Race theory -- the race traitor approach -- that motivates folks like Tim Wise. They attack Marxism and, if they do speak to class, they subscribe to a stratification theory of social class where there are no internal relations between classes.
And we already know that academia is not a hotbed of Marxist analysis, either. And as Michaels already made clear in his talk at the Harvard forum, he's a liberal and the only people who thinks he is "a man of the left" are conservative bloggers. Why he said that, I don't know. You and Reed seem to think he's a Marxist. does he tell you he's a Marxist? If so, then why is he telling people at Harvard he's not?
shag