From: "Greg Schofield" <g_schofield-AT-dingoblue.net.au>
Subject: Re: AUT: Historical as against ideological analysis
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 17:48:32 +0800


Floyse I really don't know what to make of your posting.

First you pluck just one section out and act like I made a purposeful misreading when I stated very clearly that you originally raised the accusation that I understood classes according to incomes (which I never raised and don't in fact believe). I then went through a previous post of yours to see why we might be disagreeing - the post you referred me to which I assumed would bear on the questions you raised.

In that post I found one sentence which seemed to be saying something which would give some credence to your original view.

In that context I tried to reread what I had said in the context of what you appeared to have said earlier in order to understand your objection. The only logical conclusion I could come to is the one I illustrusted below. 

To this fairly conservative and non-accusative approach you reply -
"If this is the limit of your reasoning, the discussion stops here."

All I tried to do was make some sense, based on what you referred me to, of the so far unsupported and ridiculous initial statements about my post that you made! Is this not the kettle calling the pot black?

At least mine was an honest attempt which was couched in the terms of "a reading" of your words, I purposefully left open the opportunity for you to correct me - and what is more perhaps try and sustain your original accusations which I still cannot see as being related to anything I have written and, as I stated, are the obverse of my firmly held opinions.

This is just the type of ideological argumentation which I am railing again - no clarity is coming from but more accusations, and what are these based on? You have apparently decided I am some devil incarnate which must be exorcised, and against this apparition any accusation will do? If this is the case then clearly the matter ends here.

Please consider rereading my posting and perhaps responding in a more edifying fashion, I am not trying to pick fights but further develop my own understandings and hopefully in the process contributing to that of others.

I don't understand why, on this particular list, vitrol and accusation are so common and used over so little - it seems an extreme malady when simple things cannot be discussed amongst comrades without the debate itself being smothered under bile.

I also resent spending the time reading your references and writting replies, after giving thought as to how to further debate by doing so, only for you to scan through the posting looking for an excuse to abuse it and end any attempt at debate in some type of miscast dramatic flourish.

"Perhaps.  The thermometer can also be read as to 
count in Kelvin, but any conclusions drawn on a body 
temperature of 37 Kelvin would be about as useful."

Cheap shots are easily made, I hope you had not been saving this one up to waste on me alone.

Yours in growing disgruntlement,
Greg Schofield - who actually believes these lists should be useful for furthering debate and understanding.

--- Message Received ---
From: Floyce White <anti_property-AT-yahoo.com>
To: aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 00:37:09 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: AUT: Historical as against ideological analysis

In reply to Greg, post 375, I quote:


>When you say: "Your method of defining classes by 
>income is fundamentally flawed, therefore, any 
>conclusions based on this argument are unfounded."
>
>I believe you are referencing my statement about 
>this class becoming managers and bureacrats. In your 
>referred post you make this statement.
>
>"Another way to attack the self-organization of the
>working class is to define classes as something other
>than property classes.  In this way, capitalists can
>pretend to be working-class people and can continue 
>to infiltrate workers' groups and prevent self-
>organization.  For example, classes could be defined 
>by occupation.  Butcher, baker, candlestick maker--
>all are forms of work, so all doers of work are
>supposedly working class.  Managers, executives, and
>'the bosses' are seen as 'real' capitalists."
>
>Which can be read as to count managers into the 
>working class. I beleive you make the assumption 
>that because I do not and that I used the expression 
>new middle class that I must therefore be using 
>income as a defining category.


"Which can be read as to count managers into the 
working class[?]"

Perhaps.  The thermometer can also be read as to 
count in Kelvin, but any conclusions drawn on a body 
temperature of 37 Kelvin would be about as useful.

If this is the limit of your reasoning, the 
discussion stops here.

Greg Schofield
Perth Australia
g_schofield-AT-dingoblue.net.au
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________

Use LesTecML Mailer (http://www.lestec.com.au/)
* Powerful filters.
* Create you own headers.
* Have email types launch scripts.
* Use emails to automat your work.
* Add comments on receive.
* Use scripts to extract and check emails.
* Use MAID to create taylor-made solutions.
* LesTecML Mailer is fully controlled by REXX.
* A REXX interpreter is freely available.
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________


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