> Now, back to shag and me. From Mike's perspective we probably are (in some
> slovenly definition of ultra-leftism he works from) both ultra-left and,
> since that is a moral failing rather than a political position, both
> narcissists. We are on the left of lbo-talk, whether ultra-left or not is of
> course a matter of debate. I take the position that "we" (the
> working-classes of the world) might well lose; that capitalist barbarism may
> triumph, and from those still bitten by the Bug of Progress that is plenty
> ultra-left.
I don't see either of you as ultra-left, especially not you Carrol. You are almost the direct opposite (I don't mean ultra-right of course) with your Olympian position and disdain for moralism. My interpretation of your politics is that it is quite close to a Second International position asserting historical inevitability, with a key reversal of the 'inevitability' to 'indeterminacy' - the similarity remaining in that there is no role for conscious efforts to change the course of history.
Mike