One of the biggest issues today is that the general left(left leaning liberal, left libertarians) rejects a proper class analysis or rather they reject a class analysis in favor of a cultural analysis. While culture and the like are really important to analyze, it ultimately avoids the economic question.

When one looks into the cultural aspects of things one seeks to solve it through shallow solutions which usually do not act as truly dynamic shift in the relations between people. One can solve things like racial prejudice or discrimination; sexism; gender discrimination etc. by creating hiring incentives, marketing/ promoting ideas of diversity etc. but what is left after all those things? Who put the power structures of oppression in the first place? Who holds cultural hegemony on society?

When you try to change society through your cultural analysis are you really changing society? Are you using your own tools? Or are you using your master’s tools? Are you simply now using your master’s tools to perpetuate the system of oppression to a diverse group of people instead one? Now the both the masters and slaves are diverse, multicultural etc. but there are still masters and slaves so what have you solved if you’re still using your master’s system of abuse and oppression? I don’t know of any slave who said: “we need more black masters, that’ll make things more fair”. It would be insane to call a slave who yearns for the destruction of the system of slavery a “class reductionist”.

Because slavery IS an economic issue, it IS a class issue and takes precedence above all other thing as the thing that almost constantly oppresses people. The economic day to day struggle is the class struggle, racism, sexism, the struggle for LGBTQ rights is all under the economic struggle; the class struggle.

  • TeethOrCoat
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    4 years ago

    When you try to change society through your cultural analysis are you really changing society?

    Obviously not, since to do so would actually require some action on the part of either the administrators of society or the masses. A class analysis wouldn’t do it either. An analysis can certainly inspire that action, but ultimately cannot do so alone.

    It would be insane to call a slave who yearns for the destruction of the system of slavery a “class reductionist”.

    It would be just so to call anyone who yearns for the destruction of the system of capitalism a “class reductionist” too because just doing so does not fully constitute the qualities that would make one a class reductionist. You are missing a larger argument from the people who levy that title on you. No, I highly doubt it is just because you wish to dismantle capitalism. Maybe in your composition, you should also explain why people think being a class reductionist is bad.