Re: labour aristocracy

[Ben Courtice <benj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

DMS (it's David isn't it?) wrote:

If we talk about the advantage one sector of the working class
has over another, all we are really discussing is the different
levels and histories of capital's (and capitals') development.


To call that privilege; to misuse that to argue that a class'
interests are golden chained to capital; to propose a "new" Main
contradiction, is just another variant of commodity fetishism,
with the commodity this time being labor power itself.



We're not just discussing the "different levels and histories" of
capitalism's development. We're discussing how they impact on working
class struggle. That's what understanding the labour aristocracy is for.

Regarding imperialism: David's point that the main investment flows are
between developed countries completely misses the point. The uneven
development of the world economy means that goods in the Third World are
produced in conditions of low labour productivity, and in the first
world in conditions of high labour productivity. When these goods leave
the national market and find a place on the world market, we find that
suddenly the difference in productivity is shown up. This was all
explained in Capital vol. I. If, say, goods are produced at an average
40 units of labour-power in an imperialist nation, but seventy units in
an underdeveloped country, and the world market average brings it down
to 50 units, then the underdeveloped country is effectively selling at a
loss, so value is transferred to the imperialist nations (who in turn
make, in this hypothetical example, a superprofit of 10 units). (I hope
I got that all right, I always found economics difficult) Anyway how
this theory impacts on financial matters, trade terms etc gives me a
headache but think in terms of trade deficits, national debt etc...

However, it's not my aim here to prove the existence of imperialism and
the divide into rich and poor nations. The labour aristocracy theory
hinges on the theory of imperialism. If you doubt the existence of
imperialism, as put forward by Lenin, I can only suggest a [re-]reading
of Lenin and Mandel as I said in the original post. Otherwise I'm not
(now) trying to debate that.

As to "a new Main contradiction" -- I never claimed that, I don't think
anyone on this list did, David .

As the old saying goes: Class consciousness is figuring out which side
of the fence you're on. Class analysis is figuring out who is there with
you. I've seen plenty of class consciousness in the contributions from
David and Tom but unfortunately their class analysis doesn't seem to get
far beyond "workers of the world unite! You have nothing to lose but
your chains!". I'm not trying to be rude, fine sentiments, but not
enough for determining the strategy of anything beyond a propaganda
circle IMHO.

Ben Courtice


~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.