Where are the black anarchists?

[kropotkin]

so what's there to disagree with?

 

[cockneyrebel]

The whole term middle class!

 

[kropotkin]

The whole term middle class!

I think the problem here is that it is being seen as a class, in the same way that 'capitalist' and 'working' are seen as classes. It isn't a class in that sense- it is just a description of layers within the working class. Seen that way you can't really disagree with what Lletsa wrote.

 

[Epicurus]

Stop wingeing.

kropotkin: Just for my own understanding can I ask? When you say “Those in top management positions and owners of small businesses are middle class”, is that only small businesses that have employees or would you include self-employed individuals with a small business; or would it then depend on what type of business it was?



Edit: Maybe reading another one of your posts I’ve found the answer to my question, is it that middleclass people are really working class, it is just they who think mof themselves as middle class.

Like just two classes the boss class and the working class.

Boss class people who own the means of production ect……….

 

[kropotkin]

yeah- and I was paraphrasing Lletsa anyway

 

[cockneyrebel]

It isn't a class in that sense- it is just a description of layers within the working class. Seen that way you can't really disagree with what Lletsa wrote.

But what layers? The descriptions LLETSA gave don't really tell you anything.

 

[LLETSA]

LLETSA your definitions of class, outside the economic definitions, still seem very vague. The “quite large” section of people from the “intermediate” section for instance, I would say are working class, and a lot of them don’t meet the stereotypes you present. My mum for example is from a totally working class background (both economic and cultural) and became a primary school teacher. For a start she didn’t even go to uni but teacher training college (as many teachers do), but is still, in every sense of the word, working class. I imagine there are many other teachers from similar circumstances. Because if you say that the large majority of the “intermediate” section are middle class that is taking a large section out of the workers movement.

What about white collar workers like me who work in the council (and other office workers) and now days make up a huge section of the work force. Where does that section fit in?

Many people who are part of the working class don't necessarily see it that way, but does that mean they aren't part of the working class? Also many people who see themselves as part of the working class (like my grandad who is an out and out lumpen), aren't in any real political sense or collective sense, so what does that mean?

I think the last poll I saw done said that way over 70% of people saw themselves as working class though.



Marx dealt with these kind of issues but in more definite way. The petty bourgeois, lumpen proletariat, labour aristocracy, professional caste etc all describe the layers you mention but in meaningful terms.

In reality there is a lot of flux. A lot of my mates at school who became self-employed have become the most anti-working class reactionaries I know, and I should think the impact of being part of the “petty bourgeoisie” that removes you from the working class has a lot to do with it. Indeed they are worse in their outlook than most “middle class” people I’ve met. But they'd still all see themselves as working class.

So do you agree with the kind of definitions that I’ve listed that Marx talks about or do you have different definitions that have any concrete meaning?

PS Epicurus for whatever reason you’re using it, the word “ethnics” is associated with the far-right. If you don’t want people to get the wrong idea then it’s probably best you use another term.

PPS Chuck how is the work down the docks going? Where does the kind of night shifts you do fit in to the class analyis? Petty bourgeois?

I never said all teachers are middle class. I said that, in my experience, most teachers are middle class, including those from working class backgrounds. Interestingly, you seem to conflate the working class with 'the workers' movement.' They are not the same thing. I assume you mean the labour movement, from which teachers are not excluded, for the simple fact that they are members of trade unions affiliated to the TUC - a major component of the labour movement. No other middle class member of a TUC-affiliated trade union is excluded from the labour movement either, for that matter. It doesn't make them working class though.

What about white collar workers like you? I've already said that what can be broadly termed service workers are part of the working class. Possibly a majority of working class people work in the service sector nowadays.

Are working class people who don't see themselves as working class a part of the working class? Yes. I never said anything to suggest that they were not.

I've already pointed out that in recent polls a majority of those asked saw themselves as belonging to the working class; you are simply repeating this.

I do defer to Marx however; I would imagine that he used more 'meaningful terms' throughout his work than me, you and most other people using internet forums (even Kroptkin.)

In your comments about working class self-employed people you seem to be confusing being working class with being a socialist, just as you confuse the working class with the 'workers' movement'. The two don't necessarily go together. I also agree that there is 'a lot of flux.' Never claimed otherwise.

Yes, I suppose Marx's terms still have a great deal of relevance. But I don't see that I wrote anything that suggests that I don't think so.

 

[LLETSA]

Is the assumption that within these groups outlooks are homogenous, with no variation between differenct (sub)cultures/races, etc.?

No.

In actual fact, the ones who are simplifying are those who seek to reduce a complex society to a class of capitalists and a class of those subservient to them.

 

[LLETSA]

I remember "British Bulldog".....classic game.....

Death Can, now there was a brutal game, as was Tunnel of Death......

Was it this brutalised working class upbringing that left you itching to see some action in Iraq?

 

[LLETSA]

I agree with it because he is just describing the world as it is- it wasn't a political post and had little to do with class as I understand it.

Those in top management positions and owners of small businesses are middle class.
These people have middle class outlook (undefined)
Those below them also have a middle class outlook (undefined) whilst not having the income to sustain the lifestyle comfortably.

Each individual's politics are influenced by, but semi-autonomous from their class.



It's just a striaght-up description of advertising sociological categories isn't it? And they evolved that class categorisation as it fits their requirements and maximises the marketing of commodities.

an ad-man would disagree with class-struggle class analysis as well

Where do I say that that 'those below top mangement have a middle class outlook'? All of them? I say nothing of the kind.

Nor did I say that 'those below top management do not have the income to comfortably sustain a middle class lifestyle.'

You cannot "define" a middle class outlook any more than you can "define" a working class one. But perhaps you have spent insufficient time among working class people (as opposed to political activists who happen to come from the working class) to recognise when you are in the presence of middle class, as opposed to working class people. Or maybe not, says LLETSA as he sees Kropotkin, Icepick and Cockney opening their stable doors and saddling up their high horses.

Do you deny that people's social backgrounds or social status have a bearing on their political views?

Why don't you ever define your "class struggle analysis"?

 

[blamblam]

You cannot "define" a middle class outlook any more than you can "define" a working class one. But perhaps you have spent insufficient time among working class people (as opposed to political activists who happen to come from the working class) to recognise when you are in the presence of middle class, as opposed to working class people. Or maybe not, says LLETSA as he sees Kropotkin, Icepick and Cockney opening their stable doors and saddling up their high horses.

Do you deny that people's social backgrounds or social status have a bearing on their political views?

I know who in my head I categorise socially as "middle class" and working class, and I do it by accent. My family are entirely sociologically working class (manual workers) and I have spent a lot of time in their company, thanks.

My friends, girlfriends and co-workers are generally middle class. From anecdotal personal stuff and generally I can't see that the middle/working class divide has any more relatedness to political views/outlook as other things such as religion, race, subculture (goth/townie/grunger etc.) or geographical location. In fact I think it generally has less.

Why don't you ever define your "class struggle analysis"?

If you asked, I'd define it as this:
The working class consists of all the people in society who can not get by without selling our time and energy to a boss - by working. I.e. if we do not make large amounts of money from property holdings or owning a business we have to be wage labourers, or in some places in the world rely on state welfare or crime.

The capitalist class consists of those individuals who do not have to work (though they generally do) since they draw enough income from property such as land, housing or businesses/stocks and shares.

The class struggle lies in this: bosses want workers to work the longest hours for the least pay, workers want to work the shortest hours for the most pay. A struggle results which manifests itself in a myriad of different ways.

 

[LLETSA]

If you asked, I'd define it as this:
The working class consists of all the people in society who can not get by without selling our time and energy to a boss - by working. I.e. if we do not make large amounts of money from property holdings or owning a business we have to be wage labourers, or in some places in the world rely on state welfare or crime.

The capitalist class consists of those individuals who do not have to work (though they generally do) since they draw enough income from property such as land, housing or businesses/stocks and shares.

The class struggle lies in this: bosses want workers to work the longest hours for the least pay, workers want to work the shortest hours for the most pay. A struggle results which manifests itself in a myriad of different ways.

It was Kropotkin that I was asking to define his 'class struggle analysis', but I appreciate your having a stab in his absence. I will, in the meantime, wait with bated breath for him to post up another link to the Gallery of Obscure Gurus and Ignored Prophets.

But do you think that the class struggle manifests itself only in the workplace? And how do you think that you (not you personally) are ever going to get those who work for a living (which defines them as working class in your eyes) in jobs which give them a very nice lifestyle indeed under capitalism to make common cause with those that do not? Because the vast majority of them, as history proves, never will. They see their interests as lying with the capitalists, not the working class (funnily enough, this type of person usually has no difficulty in identifying working class people.) And any economic downturn will, as we have seen before, only make most of them rush to the employers' side and batten down the hatches.

While all of them work for an employer, there are no revolutionary surgeons, merchant bankers, barristers, etc etc, and there never will be. They don't even want to know the likes of you or me.

 

[kropotkin]

What about Chris Pallis (AKA Maurice Brinton, theorist of Solidarity) who died last month? He was a neurosurgeon, was he not?

Which "Gallery of Obscure Gurus and Ignored Prophets" are you referring to, by the way?

And I thought you were scathing of people who get extremely defensive when asked simple questions about their politics?

 

[LLETSA]

I don't know if I'd agree with this. It's too fluffy. I think the definitions of the professional caste and petty bourgeois are better in describing top management and small business owners.

Having had to approach one of the managers at work last week, the smug, self-satisfaction on his face mildly annoyed me. But not as much as when he sneered, 'Just look at you LLETSA, you're a disgrace-you'll obviously never make it into the high echelons of the professional caste like me.'

Reflecting on this harsh judgement, I called in at the local offie on the way home, with ideas of cheering myself up with a few cans. I was interested to hear the owner telling one of his staff that he was in line for the local Chamber of Commerce's Petty Bourgeois Person of the Year Award.

Then I woke up.

 

[LLETSA]

One anarchist brain surgeon doth not a revolution make....

What about Chris Pallis (AKA Maurice Brinton, theorist of Solidarity) who died last month? He was a neurosurgeon, was he not?

Which "Gallery of Obscure Gurus and Ignored Prophets" are you referring to, by the way?

And I thought you were scathing of people who get extremely defensive when asked simple questions about their politics?

Scathing? Me? Never!

The man you refer to might have been a great guy and an extremely clever person. However, I challenge you to find any other neurosurgeons in that or any other anarchist microgroup. Not to mention merchant bankers or barristers.

I wouldn't say that I was being defensive. After all, I am defending what I say and taking the trouble to explain it, while others prefer to spout the jargon without ever seeking to clarify their meaning....

Still looking for the links to the Sacred Texts?

 

[kropotkin]

sorry, what do you want me to answer? I only saw vague open-ended questions that had clearly already been answered elsewhere on the thread. Is there something you genuinely want to know about what I think? If there is- go ahead and ask and i'll do my best to answer.

Pall

there are no revolutionary surgeons

What about Chris Pallis (AKA Maurice Brinton, theorist of Solidarity) who died last month? He was a neurosurgeon, was he not?

I challenge you to find any other neurosurgeons in that or any other anarchist microgroup.

such honesty! Solidarity were libertarian marxists, by the way. You should read some of their stuff- it was really very good (www.endpage.org carries some here)

 

[LLETSA]

sorry, what do you want me to answer? I only saw vague open-ended questions that had clearly already been answered elsewhere on the thread. Is there something you genuinely want to know about what I think? If there is- go ahead and ask and i'll do my best to answer.

Pall







such honesty! Solidarity were libertarian marxists, by the way. You should read some of their stuff- it was really very good (www.endpage.org carries some here)

I knew that it wouldn't be long before I got a link!

You have been asked a number of times, however, to define your 'class struggle analysis' of the issue of class. And can you really not hear the questioning inflection in my voice when it pours forth scepticism about the idea of merchant bankers and the like making common cause with supermarket shelf stackers?

 

[kropotkin]

I defined it as 'class struggle' class analysis because I couldn't (and still can't) see any difference between the ad-man class analysis used to market goods and perform focus groupings for political policies and what you have said.

I broadly agree with icepick, for what it's worth.

Would you prefer I didn't link to anything again? Do you dislike underlined text?

 

[LLETSA]

I defined it as 'class struggle' class analysis because I couldn't (and still can't) see any difference between the ad-man class analysis used to market goods and perform focus groupings for political policies and what you have said.

I broadly agree with icepick, for what it's worth.

Would you prefer I didn't link to anything again? Do you dislike underlined text?

So you broadly agree with Icepick. Yet you never pick up on any of the difficulties contained in your capitalists-versus-the-rest universe that are pointed out. Like in the last few posts, for example. Can the mere citing of the example of one libertarian Marxist neurosurgeon really be considered an answer to the assertion that, nine times out of ten, highly-paid professional people will always side with capital?

I am not bothered at all about how many links you post up. It does make me speculate, though, on how doing this, for some people, often substitutes for having to explain what they think 'on the hoof,' if you like. I've noticed on here that some Trots also do it. It all helps to fuel the idea that what is most important in their politics, for some, is the theory, and that this theory is only safe in the hands of The Masters. As well as the suspicion that Anarchism and Leninist Marxism is, for some, a crutch. A kind of substitute religion, in fact.

 

[kropotkin]

and there we go again. bye lletsa.

I'm not going to engage any further on this with you, partly because you are a prick, and partly because you don't enter into these things honestly.

 

[LLETSA]

Toys, Kropotkin, of, pram, out, throws

and there we go again. bye lletsa.

I'm not going to engage any further on this with you, partly because you are a prick, and partly because you don't enter into these things honestly.

You have just spent nearly half of a thread misquoting me (in the guise of 'paraphrasing'), or telling downright lies about what I've said. And I 'don't enter into these things honestly'?

Bye then. You've actually moved mountains there to convince me of your point of view.

 

[kropotkin]

I'm not throwing anything out of my pram, Lletsa. And I like the hyperbole there, "half a thread" indeed!

 

[LLETSA]

I'm not throwing anything out of my pram, Lletsa. And I like the hyperbole there, "half a thread" indeed!

Oh yes you are!

 

[kropotkin]

oh no i'm not

 

[LLETSA]

oh no i'm not

Are.

 

[kropotkin]

aren't

 

[kropotkin]

.

And let that be an end to this sorry pantomime

 

[sacx]

@ this thread.

 

[LLETSA]

.

And let that be an end to this sorry pantomime

You're one to talk: how do you perform surgery on a 'brian'?

And will just any brian do or do you have to advertise for one?

 

[Chuck Wilson]

Was it this brutalised working class upbringing that left you itching to see some action in Iraq?

Have Workers Power ditched the long rifle tactic or are they still directing the workers defence squads in Iraq?