File spoon-archives/aut-op-sy.archive/aut-op-sy_2001/aut-op-sy.0103, message 28


From: nsolari-AT-fys.com.ar
Subject: Re: AUT: Re: empire & globalization, was...
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 11:39:44 -0300


--0__=03256A06004932FB8f9e8a93df938690918c03256A06004932FB



Though I've been on this list for a couple of months, this is my first post
and, as Sean, I tought to send this mail earlier,  but I do it now.
The discutions here are interesting, but to complex, and sometimes too
abstract, for me, yet I'd like to say something, particularly  to Commie00.
I think your position is near to dogmatism and simplification. That's not
good if you want to understand certain process.
I 'd like to know were do you live, because it seems quite simple to
understand your reality. for one side, the ruling class, and for the other,
the working class. Two groups, two interests, too simple. I consider
reality as a very complex thing, full of contradictions. Of course, the
logic of it is accumulation of capital.

I can only speak about my country, Argentina, and I'll try to say what I
want using this concrete reference.
There is here something that can be consider as a "ruling class" but not a
tight one. One sector of it wants to "dolarizar", sorry, don't know the
word in English, to change Argentina currency, peso,  for the US currency,
dollar. Banks, ex-public companies now private, etc. mainly for having lot
of pesos. But another sector, needs to devaluate, particularly certain
companies wich export, Techint, Perez Companq, etc. mainly for having lot
of dollars abroad (and certainly for the advantages that will be for them
to change the relation peso/dolar). The first one is against Mercosur and
the last one is in favor of it.
They are ruling class, of course, but they are fighting for different
project, for they accumulate in a different way.  This difference can not
be forgotten , since It'll be quite difficult to understand what's going on
here.This kind of differences inside the "ruling class" must be, I'm sure,
everywhere.

But if you consider a capitalist, as I do, as those who have capital
(personification of capital) how can be understood the position of small
companies?. They are capitalists, but what is the connection betewen, say,
Bill Gates and a guy who has four emplyees and bills USD 200.000 per year?.
They accumulate in different ways, so they have a different place in social
relation of production, and for that reason, they think and act in
different ways. Although they are all capitalist, they are not necesarily
part of the "ruling class".

I think It's missed the point including everyone in the same group.
Speaking of "the ruling class" as one compact thing is pointless. And to
give all capitalist the same interest is not useful to understand social
process.

The same for those who are not capitalist, I mean, those who do not have
capital or are not personification of capital.
In Argentina there is more than 14% of recognized unemployment. Some people
speaks of more than 30%. Are they working class? They are fighting to enter
the system, not to break it. They want to be exploited. They are
completelly desperate.

What about cops, public employees, teachers, are they "capitalist"? In my
opinion, no. I consider them only "part" of the accumulation. They are
functional to capital but certanly not capitalist. They are "used" by
capital as an ideological containment.  Again, I understand capitalist as
only those who have capital.

Well, that's my opinion. And as always, it's open to new point of views


     --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005