[Edited Message Follows] [Reason: Corrected sentence that stated the opposite of what was intended.]
It's noteworthy that the phrases "petit bourgeois" or "petite bourgeoisie" (I prefer the solidly naturalized English "petty bourgeois/ie" as it avoids confusion about French grammatical gender)--long rebuked in certain US Marxist quarters as catchphrases of vulgar or pseudo-Marxism--should suddenly be revived. Unanswered questions: * How representative of the eight or ten thousand supernumeraries in attendance at the rallies--thousands of whom broke through a flimsy outer perimeter at the Capitol and therefore could also be seen as rioting--were the 125 arrestees? * What possible selection bias may have been incorporated in the choice of arrestees, given that almost nobody was arrested on the spot? If four hundred or so rioters "caught on tape" so to speak were "triaged," for arrest, what was the basis for prioritizing those selected? Perception of a leadership role based on speech and demeanor? Access to resources for publishing the images they so stupidly and proudly captured--possession of higher-end cameras and cellphones for example? * Can we justify characterizing the entire group of thousands attending the so-called "rally" as petty bourgeois on the basis of the group "filmed" inside the Capitol and then selected for arrest? * Finally, what does this analysis say about the real elephant in the room, the seventy-odd million who voted for Trump? Are they all mere petty bourgeois? What about the possibility that working-class Trump supporters, if there were any of these latter-day Archie Bunkers, mostly couldn't swing this expensive trip mid-week after the holidays and had to content themselves with sending thoughts and prayers? Nobody denies that Trumpism operates in favor of the bourgeoisie. Is its support really limited exclusively to the suddenly revived petty bourgeoisie, or were the PB, if in fact predominant, disproportionately represented by the selection inherent in the expense and inconvenience of attending? * Who qualifies as working-class these days anyway? While we're at it, what about the composition of the BLM demos and the vulgar Graeberite occupations surrounding them? A few numbskulls have claimed that virtually the whole US left is petty bourgeois. Should we revisit that kerfuffle? Drawing apodictic dialectical broad conclusions on the basis of this admittedly limited analysis--if anyone is tempted--is obviously unwarranted. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#5703): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/5703 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/79956267/21656 -=-=- POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. -=-=- Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/8674936/1316126222/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
