Whatever were the merits in the 1930s of speaking of the "most reactionary elements of the capitalist class" or whatever, since then analyses which feature divisions in the capitalist class have been mostly devoted to the cause of one opportunist policy or sect or another. The final degeneration of what was perhaps the best of the New Communist Movement of the '70s -- LRS -- was marked by its desperate attempts to draw such divisions. Some LRS people in Chicago even decided that Daley represented the "progressive wing of the bourgeoisie."
Only under extreme revolutionary pressure do _significant_ divisions develop in the capitalist class. The division between capitalists supporting Bush and capitalists opposing to him is utterly trival. I pretty much agree with A. Holberg's post on "fascism." I recall the most disastrous paper assignment of my time as a teacher of freshman composition. I asked the class to discuss "thoughtfulness." The resulting papers simply reduced every eulogistic term to a synonym for "good," and equated all with thoughtfulness. The term "fascism" has been degraded to a mere (sloppy) synonym for every adjective leftists have for capitalism. It means nothing anymore but "gee that's bad." And the subtext usually is, in fact "that" is so bad that we had better unite with every other bad guy around to fight this special bad guy. Carrol _______________________________________________ Leninist-International mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international
