>>Classes are formed by the introduction of new productive equipment.  That 
is, by the reorganization  of the means of life. Almost always, the  new class 
and new classes are tied to  and work with the new means of  production.<<
 
^^^^^ CB; So when capitalism introduced electricity and oilbased productive  
equipment to replace steam and steam engines from the first phase of the  
industrial revolution, what were the new classes that replaced the bourgeoisie  
and proletariat that Marx and Engels discuss in _The Manifesto_ ? 
 

MP: This is what is written: 
 
1) Classes are formed by the introduction of new productive equipment. 
 
2) That is, by the reorganization  of the means of life. 
 
3) Almost always, the new class and new classes are tied to and work with  
the new means of production. 
 
Electricity and oil based production did in fact change the form of the  
working class and the form of the bourgeoisie. The proletariat of which Marx  
writes about is not the same industrial proletariat that I was. This is 
obvious.  
The issue was never posed what replaces the proletariat, which is your lawyer  
type thinking. 
 
The proletariat is a section of humanity that has no other means of  securing 
life other than the sale of its labor power. The proletariat of today -  
March 2006, is a very different kind of worker or proletatiat, than during the  
time of Marx. Classes formed means the serf becomes a proletariat and then an  
industrial proletariat and then this industrial proletariat changes its form in 
 relationship to steam and electricity because the instruments of production  
change. Industrial equipment driven by electricity calls for a different kind 
of  proletariat - worker, than machinery driven by steam. 
 
Class are in fact formed by the introduction of new productive equipment.  
Classes are "replaced" by a new form of class as a lengthy process of 
transition 
 in the material power of production. Your question is bogus Mr., Lawyer. 
 
Your ideology blocks you from the obvious. You speak on a class being  
replaced to answer the fact that classes rise and fall and are created by  
introducing new productive forces. Todays productive equipment pushes huge  
sections of 
the proletariat away from the means of production because its labor  is 
superfluous to the production of value. 
 
Now the industrial bourgeoisie as an industrial bourgeoisie evolved as a  new 
form of class from within bourgeoisie based on and in correspondence with  
changes in the material power of production. Then along comes a new form of  
bourgeoisie in the expression of the financial-industrial capitalist signaling  
the domination of finance over the social agenda of capital. See . . . the Wall 
 Street Imperialist of the post Reconstruction era was a new form of the  
bourgeoisie. At any rate no one mistakes him for the merchant capitalist. 
 
Classes are formed by the introduction of new productive equipment. That  is, 
by the reorganization  of the means of life. Almost always, the new  class 
and new classes are tied to  and work with the new means of  production. 
 
The proletariat today is undergoing incredible change because the form of  
classes change with changes in the means of production. Class is much more than 
 
a category of property and by property what is meant is ownership rights over 
 the things that dominate and subjugate people. 
 
CB: This is the ABC of Waistline, whose sometimes a "Marxist" and sometimes  
a Tofflerite. 
 
MP: I accept this as your opinion although you have stated several times  you 
have not read his books. May I ask where Toffler states that classes are  
formed by the introduction of new productive methods and equipment?
 
Mr. Lawyer , , , I accept my Tofflerite whatever, but I ain't no Uncle Tom  
crying over US plants running away from US national soil and begging the  
bourgeoisie to build new plants so that American workers can have jobs. 
 
See you way of looking at things lead you to your approach and my way of  
looking at things lead me to my approach. 
 
I say win the workers to the cause of communism. 
 
You say lets build more plants for American workers and that the most  
poverty stricken section the workers have to many social problems and the  
workers 
with their hands on the basic means of production are truly  revolutionary. 
 
The clincher is that you have no credentials other than being a fast  talking 
lawyer. 
 
 
Tragic
 
 
Melvin P. 

_______________________________________________
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
[email protected]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis

Reply via email to