Adam Proctor:
> If no concrete political trajectory flows from the logic of the worker
> in capitalism
Hold on, you are mixing up two distinct questions. Carrol's point concerns whether a concrete political trajectory flows from a *correct understanding of the critique of political economy*. His answer is that it does not. I would concur.
It's an entirely different whether a concrete political trajectory, or I would prefer to say a concrete political aim (the abolition of capitalism, of labor, of the law of value) flows from the logic of the worker in capitalism. For the sake of the survival of the human species, I certainly hope it does. But "flow" is a bad work, implying spontaneity. I think Marx's gamble in publishing _Capital_ is that if workers are made aware of their role in capitalism, they would find it intolerable. But there are no guarantees.
But having the right goal is no guarantee that one formulates the proper perspective for reaching it. I think that was Carrol's point. I mean, Postone has some pretty tepid Green-New Left-civil society politics. Holloway seems to be into Zapatismo and community gardens. Both have a very solid understanding of Marx, but very bad politics.