[lbo-talk] Am I or Am I Not Charlie?

[Arthur Maisel]

"Demands" doesn't necessarily imply a precondition, but maybe "entails"
would have been less open to misconstrual. Same with "understanding
ourselves . . . as antagonists," which might have been clearer as
"understanding ourselves . . . to be antagonists." Neither expression can
be described as "empty" in the way "understanding ourselves" might be
without a predicate. And all predicates are not of equal value. "We
ourselves [are] antagonists with our opponents" means something even if "We
ourselves [are] Charlie" doesn't.

On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 1:35 PM, Carrol Cox <cbcox at ilstu.edu> wrote:


> No! Such understanding may _emerge_ from class struggle; such emergence may
> even be a precondition for _victory_ in that struggle. But it is absurd to
> see it as a precondition for  class struggle. And of course the proposition
> may be empty, depending on what is meant by "understanding ourselves."
>
> Carrol
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org]
> On Behalf Of JOANNA A.
> Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2015 7:43 PM
> To: lbo-talk
> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Am I or Am I Not Charlie?
>
>
>
>
> It just may be that class struggle demands understanding both ourselves and
> our opponents as antagonists.
>
> Brian
>
> ---yes that's what I was trying to say.
>
> J
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>