unabomber & the proletariat

Alex Trotter uburoi at panix.com
Thu Oct 5 23:29:29 MDT 1995

>From outward appearance it seems that the unabomber does in fact, as
Rakesh points out, reject the exclusivity of "the proletariat" as the
revolutionary agent. To be sure, leftism is *not* the same thing as
communism--and I think the unabomber probably knows this--but he devotes
no serious discussion to it in his manifesto. It could be that the
unabomber deliberately stayed away from certain forms of discourse to
throw the Feds off his track. Maybe he's well versed in the whole range
of marxist and anarchist theory, and doesn't want to let on....

How does the proletariat abolish itself? The question of the century, no,
the millennium. Not through representation. If the proletariat really is
humanity, there is no ideology it can call its own, because ideology is
by definition a partial interest masquerading as the general interest.
After almost two centuries, there is reason to doubt that the working
class can be anything but reformist because it is, in its
materiality, a category of capital. The class is supposed to become
revolutionary when it is a class-for-itself (i.e., conscious) and not
simply the class-in-itself. Marxists have thus had to define the
proletarait in terms of consciousness. But "class consciousness" seems to
help perpetuate the condition of the proletariat. In a world in which,
increasingly, the condition of proletariat is becoming generalized,
perhaps the species consciousness will bypass class consciousness. It
would seem that the abolition of work is the means by which the
proletariat abolishes itself as well as class society (i.e.,


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


More information about the Marxism mailing list