> On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 8:15 PM, shag carpet bomb
> <shag at cleandraws.com>wrote:
>
> He
>> says that he has gotten a great deal of enjoyment out of abusing
>> them
>>
>
> Shag, you really should stop making up statements and attributing them
> to
> other people. That's twice you've done it to me in this thread alone,
> and it
> makes it much harder to take the rest of what you have to say
> seriously.
> (For the record, I can't remember the last time I have "gotten a great
> deal
> of enjoyment" out of any online exchange. They're good for idly
> passing the
> time, and occasionally sharing useful information.)
you're right. you didn't say you enjoy it. Ijust interepreted you as doing so because it sounded like you were bragging about it to the rest of the list. When someone says "abusing the hell out of friends" I assume they hare having fun (enjoying) tweaking them! Why are you ashamed of that? I am having fun tweaking you right now!
"I've been abusing the hell out of friends on Facebook who have been fishing for sympathy over their lack of power. "You had a blackout? With no electricity? Why, you poor thing! Let me call some of my Gaza friends to tell them, and we'll all feel sorry for you together!"
In fairness, though, a lot of people here are surprisingly concerned about the East Coast.
-- "Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen lytlað.""
>
>
>> 3. in the u.s., they are from upper middle class families
>>
>
> How would you know? Apparently you can tell not only thoughts others
> have
> never expressed, but the social backgrounds of people whose identities
> are a
> mystery to you! Let the rest of us in on your secret?
at that point, I was speaking to ravi, saying imagine that you are the person on facebook and this is what you do. 1., 2., 3., etc. If you want to think it was written to describe your actions directly, be my guest!
>
>
>> 5. you, the reader, don't think, "gee, that sucks. i'm sorry you
>> don't
>> have power dudes. chin up."
>>
>
> Which would simply be silly, when my power goes out four times daily.
it would be silly for someone to feel bad for someone else who is better off?
what are you saying. i don't understand at all.
>
>
>> joe does agree that there are some oppression(s) that matter more
>> than
>> others.
you think that the struggle of labor in the u.s. is as important as the struggle of palestinians?
nope. wastn' aware of that. i read your labor aristocracy comments quite wrong then. i assumed what you were saying was the usual line:
there's a labor aristocracy that protects the relative privilege of labor in western countries, the u.s. in particular. they do so because they receive "petty privileges" purchased on the backs of people in third world countries. they don't just get these "petty privileges" passively, either, they get them actively by supporting imperialist policies that directly oppress people in their world countries. thus, the privilege of some members of worldwide labor is actively and purposefully bought at the expense of others, especially people of color in third world countries.
to me, that sounds like creating a hierarchy. at the very least it suggests that there is a faction of labor that possesses "petty privileges" -- specifically a higher standard of living --
I realize we are having a disagreement here but I honestly don't understand why you'd be ashamed to hold this view. What is wrong with a hiearchy of opressions if there are very real differences between groups in their physical well-being? kinda like triage, no? everyone in the emergency room needs treatment, some need it more than others. that's creating a hiearchy of who needs treatment before others. why would that be wrong, on your view? bad analogy? if so, why do you think it's a bad analogy?
you wrote:"I happen to think that some of the analyses of the aristocracy of labor you pillory are quite valuable. And to the extent that "that virtually _all_ working-class revolutionary movements have been led by that so-called aristocracy of labor" - which isn't entirely true - it goes a long way toward explaining why that leadership, and the movements it controls, have rarely objected to imperial machinations that, in part, reinforce their petty privileges. As for "the alleged aristocracy of labaor never g[etting] the alleged bribe," I suppose its time for me to repost this:
You know why people in Somalia don't enjoy your standard of living, Carrol? It isn't only because capitalism distributes resources inequitably; it's also because the resources needed to give six billion people your standard of living aren't there. Not even close. And there are reasons you get them and they don't.
If Carrol's next post includes a single meaningful response to anything I've written here, I'll be shocked.
>>
>
> Now you're getting ontological. What does it mean for a thing to
> "matter"?
> To whom? On what basis? I believe the word I either used or agreed to
> was
> "worse". And I also said that anyone who doesn't think having your
> child
> killed by an airstrike is "worse" than (for example) having your labor
> exploited by Bell Labs is "on crack." Those are my actual positions
> here,
> like 'em or not.
>
> --
> "Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure
> mægen
> lytlað."
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
-- http://cleandraws.com Wear Clean Draws ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)