The three points about the purity fetish are superb. I have your book, and look forward to supplementing/contrasting it with Losurdo's Western Marxism coming out in translation soon.
The US military/police/intelligence budget borders on a trillion dollars. That enemy is an objective obstacle to revolution in the US. You are incontestably right on the objective need for revolution though.
I do not believe the professional managerial class is a coherent class in any useful sense. The conflation of socioeconomic status with "class" ends up formally speaking lumping together say, Jamie Dimon and David North. No one with any sense really does this but why then use a term like PMC which in practice you have to not use when it lapses into blatant absurdity?
I though "demos" was not in ancient Athens etc. precisely the people in general or even the poor people in general, but specifically the people in a deme, a city ward. And this was in distinction to speaking of the people as fellow members of the clan or gens or tribe (or any of the other numerous names for such groupings.) Democracy it seemed to me is not the principle of majority rule, but a principle of class collaboration, that treats "the people" as Us vs. Them, them being foreigners abroad and foreigners at home (non-citizens, whether slaves or metics.)
And the whole point of this state was to defend property. In bourgeois states then formal equality is never meant to imply majority rule, but minority rule in the sense of defending the minority's property against the claims of the poor. And democracy also means conquest, if you can get away with it. I think it is undeniable that such democracy is better than godkings or feudal lords but this kinds of democracy is not the naturally ordained perfect society that can't be replaced in its turn. The thing is, in the US, the Constitution rejects majority rule.
The three points about the purity fetish are superb. I have your book, and look forward to supplementing/contrasting it with Losurdo's Western Marxism coming out in translation soon.
The US military/police/intelligence budget borders on a trillion dollars. That enemy is an objective obstacle to revolution in the US. You are incontestably right on the objective need for revolution though.
I do not believe the professional managerial class is a coherent class in any useful sense. The conflation of socioeconomic status with "class" ends up formally speaking lumping together say, Jamie Dimon and David North. No one with any sense really does this but why then use a term like PMC which in practice you have to not use when it lapses into blatant absurdity?
I though "demos" was not in ancient Athens etc. precisely the people in general or even the poor people in general, but specifically the people in a deme, a city ward. And this was in distinction to speaking of the people as fellow members of the clan or gens or tribe (or any of the other numerous names for such groupings.) Democracy it seemed to me is not the principle of majority rule, but a principle of class collaboration, that treats "the people" as Us vs. Them, them being foreigners abroad and foreigners at home (non-citizens, whether slaves or metics.)
And the whole point of this state was to defend property. In bourgeois states then formal equality is never meant to imply majority rule, but minority rule in the sense of defending the minority's property against the claims of the poor. And democracy also means conquest, if you can get away with it. I think it is undeniable that such democracy is better than godkings or feudal lords but this kinds of democracy is not the naturally ordained perfect society that can't be replaced in its turn. The thing is, in the US, the Constitution rejects majority rule.
In point 3, are you saying some of the left WANTS the destruction of America through socialism?