From: "cwright" <cwright-AT-21stcentury.net> Subject: Re: AUT: capitalist as risk-taker and supervisor Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 23:04:17 -0500 Sharon wrote: > This thread is really interesting. > Theoretically, what commie00 is saying sounds consistent to me, but when you > put it into practice politically, empirically and apply it to real world > situations you come up with the absurdities that Tahir is talking about. > This is the problem I am having with Marxist definitions of class (at least > of the type that commie00 is giving and that I also learned in Sociology and > Marxist theory classes) and trying to apply them to Morocco. A petty peddler > who lives in some hut in the countryside south of Mogador and barely has > enough to feed is his family, if he had someone who worked for him (either > for money or for barter or in a client/patron relation) also might fall into > such a definition. Or maybe capitalist relations of production and class > definitions would not completely apply in such a situation. The problem is that Marx was not a sociologist looking to come up with definitions that he could 'apply' to human beings. Most Marxists have, however, taken this sociological approach which ultimately is hostile to class struggle, to Marx's project of radical critique, and to the idea that no theory could ever grasp or resolve the living contradictions. Only practica-critical activity, revolution, can do that. If you try to think of Marx as a 'useful' way to study people, you will never grasp Marx's kernel, the actual revolutionary content of wht Marx was doing. I am sorry to harp on this, but I hate to see anyone waste their time with academicism in relation to Marx. For the rest, I tend to agree with you and Tahir, but commie00 knows that :) Cheers, Chris --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005