Present-day Class Distinctions (a real example)
Xxxzx at SPAMmarxists.org
Sun Oct 3 01:39:32 MDT 1999
>While there may be minor conflicts between managers and owners over such
>issues as the size of managers' salaries, or whether to distribute or
>reinvest profits, their overall interests are in perfect harmony.
I agree with what you have written, and have a better idea why so
many have been reeling from my thoughts. Thanks.
Though their interests are in common, i.e. they are both exploiters,
they exploit from different class positions -- how can you say that
the managers exploitation of labouers is the same as the officers?
The former exploits labouers, the latter exploits managers, using
different means and towards different ends. Hence I find it difficult
to see how anyone can say that there are only "basically" two classes.
I certainly will not argue that all workers, whether skilled,
unskilled, temp, or lumpen have a similiar plight and sure as hell
have more in common with one another than with any other class; but
this being true does not *make* them off the same class. Workers are
exploited, but they also exploit other workers.
They are *abstractly* one in the same exploited by capital. But the
exploitation by the bourgeois, or even the petty-bourgoeis (i.e.
managers), is something not felt by all workers! Instead, for
unskilled and temp labourers, it is other workers that order them,
exploit them, etc. These workers cannot place any class hatred
towards an opponent that they can not see, but they can place their
*every day*, practical hatred towards other workers, who command an
entirely different position than they do; who have certain skills,
certain abilities, and above all else, a relatively fixed position in
regards to the productive forces.
"In those days, after the defeat of the Paris Commune, history made
slow organisational and educational work the task of the day."
Vladimir Lenin, Tasks of the Proletariat in Our Revolution
More information about the Marxism