Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 13:41:13 -0700
From: Lisa Rogers <eqwq.lrogers-AT-email.state.ut.us>
Subject:  process of class formation


From: "Chris M. Sciabarra" <sciabrrc-AT-is2.NYU.EDU>
...the state creates differential privileges that are structurally
biased in favor of certain groups, and that these privileges
themselves are the basis of the formation of structural  classes,
rather than say, any primarily economic dimension... but the really
interesting question is  WHAT factor is primary, even as one notes
that there is an  interpenetration between the factors.  

Lisa: But Chris, must _one_ to be primary?  What if reality is just
not like that?  Multiplicity is possible, if not tidy.  The
"interpenetration" or the exact nature of the links themselves and
how that interconnection works, _that_ is interesting to me.  

Which groups does a state "create" privileges for?  For those that
are powerful enough to make the state do so?  For those that are
running the state?  For the already rich and powerful?  For those
that can be bribed with privilege to give their support to the state?

And who creates the state?  Those that hope to gain/maintain
power/wealth by doing so?  Those who want to preserve and expand
their own privileges?

I mean, I can't think of a privilege that does _not_ relate to
economics, in two ways.  Those that get them are likely to be the
rich or serve the rich in some way, and those with privilege will use
it to get more money/power.

Maybe I should have just asked what is a "privilege", but for now I
define it in terms of access to more power/money than others have.  

So, far from taking sides with "political" _or_ "economic" as "the
primary" factor in class formation, I'd rather call into question
that polarization itself.  The way I figger, reality just doesn't
separate along those lines.

Wha'd'ya think of that?



     --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

     ------------------