Re: [Marxism] Skewering "Fahrenheit 9/11"

[Scotlive@xxxxxxx]

In a message dated 7/2/04 12:42:35 PM Pacific Daylight Time, cbcox@xxxxxxxxx
writes:


> We are not sorting laundry into baskets.
>
>

I agree. But this also applies to lumping people into a certain class, with
the same interests and outlook merely according to their position in the
process of wealth creation. To me a member of the working class is someone who
identifies him or herself as such. Most workers in the US, for example, consider
themselves middle class, because they've been socially conditioned to think by a
conscious ruling class that the indiviualism implicit in a middle class
outlook on life is more desirable than the collective aspirations of a conscious
working class outlook.

Consciousness CAN take place in struggle. That doesn't mean that it
necessarily will.

Economic conditions today differ enormously from those which existed 100
years ago. Of course you know that. It's therefore crucial that our 
understanding
and application of Marx's method is adapted to meet these changes. This
involves our conception of class. Objectively, a worker is anyone who survives 
by
selling their labour power. Where do professionals fall into this? I spoke with
a socialist the other night at an event who claimed to be working class, even
though he's a teacher. Then there are workers who, by trade, are organically
linked to the ruling class and their interests. Security guards, I've
mentioned. Also soldiers, cops, workers who produce munitions and armaments, 
who work
for the Federal Government.

If you apply such an objective analysis you only end up confused. Much
better, I think, to be subjective. Every one has the potential to join the 
working
class. Consciousness is the determining and deciding factor. Inductive
reasoning does not apply.
_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism