[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xmca-l] Re: Intrinsic motivation?

How is it then, Martin, that there is a women's movement? which even includes working class women? And how is it that there are dozens of different political currents in the workers' movement, even rival trade union federations? I do not agree with the dichotomy objective (=class, or state, or whatever) vs personal. Universal and individual are either mediated by the particular or they are meaningless. I do not agree that classes step on to the stage of history as ready made subjects with self-consciousness and a political program. For a loyal Stalinist of course all these matters are settled. Women like men are guided by the Party. There is only one party of the working class. Individuals must subordinate themselves to the state, the object of the activity of a firm is to meet the 5 Year plan.
Why be surprised about what I think, Martin? What do *you* think?
*Andy Blunden*

Martin John Packer wrote:
I'm surprised to hear you say this, Andy. I would think that an argument could be made that the motive, the interest, of a class could be considered objective, in the sense that it confronts individuals as something independent of their personal motives. And even that the interest of one class in particular could be considered objective in the sense that it aligns with - or drives - a historical movement towards greater equity and lesser exploitation.


On Aug 6, 2014, at 10:18 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:

What is an objective motive? Or to put it another way, what motive is there which is not personal?