Hi Matvey and everybody--
Matvey wrote,
> This parallel was somewhat provoked by Eugene's description of
> how the term
> intelligentsia evolved. I have to credit my friend with his historical
> knowledge but will suggest that middle class is just the opposite of
> intelligentsia and "intellectual labor" has no meaningful relation to
> either of them.
>
> I base on the assumption that in the mechanism of American economy middle
> class has a special role (interestingly, American in that statement may
> mean both US and N.America). This role is to be a consumer. My assumption
> is that middle class's function is to consume. Unfortunately for some
> people, they have to have money to be able to pay for what they consume.
> The balance of American politics is how to maintain middle class as a
> vibrant consumer. A very limited number of people are needed to produce
> goods with today's high productivity, so producers cannot be sufficient
> middle class. So there appears a need for "intellectual labor" --
> sufficient amounts of people who follow rules, play a game carefully,
> produce nothing but ensure their survival through creating obstacles,
> bureaucracy, etc. The most intellectual of their skill is to be able never
> to question, feel comfortable in a tie or white blouse, and be serious
> about making great deals purchasing more and more services and goods.
> Things middle class/intellectual laborees do not need are
> bookcases because
> .. books are contagious. My point is that though middle class wears white
> and its labor is called intellectual, their function is to
> consume, not think.
I think that Matvey is right about strong association of intelligencia with
critical thinking and education at least in Russian contexts.
I also want to point out at Kohn's work about the relationship of middle
class and types of jobs that require decision making, choices, and
creativity. I have read about Kohn's work in John Tudge's chapter in Artin
Goncu's new book that I strongly recommend to all of you.
Eugene
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matvey Sokolovsky [mailto:sokolovs@uconnvm.uconn.edu]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2000 12:26 AM
> To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> Subject: middle class/intellectual labor
>
>
> I am somewhat fascinated by how the discussion of middle class and
> intellectual labor turned into an evaluation of Soviet regime and its
> experiments in extermination of people. It is also important to
> notice that
> there is a theme on the background of this discussion -- a strive for a
> fair world where women will be liberated without extermination of men but
> by man happily delegating their privileges to women (or Kosovars
> delegating
> rights to remaining Serbs and Gypsies under a fair US peacekeeping). I
> think this turn of the discussion is somewhat logical though, and I will
> try to describe why.
>
> In the begging of the discussion there was a strong assumption made that
> intelligentsia in Russia is somewhat related to middle class
> because middle
> class is mostly white color (in all meanings, but primarily shirt-wise).
> This parallel was somewhat provoked by Eugene's description of
> how the term
> intelligentsia evolved. I have to credit my friend with his historical
> knowledge but will suggest that middle class is just the opposite of
> intelligentsia and "intellectual labor" has no meaningful relation to
> either of them.
>
> I base on the assumption that in the mechanism of American economy middle
> class has a special role (interestingly, American in that statement may
> mean both US and N.America). This role is to be a consumer. My assumption
> is that middle class's function is to consume. Unfortunately for some
> people, they have to have money to be able to pay for what they consume.
> The balance of American politics is how to maintain middle class as a
> vibrant consumer. A very limited number of people are needed to produce
> goods with today's high productivity, so producers cannot be sufficient
> middle class. So there appears a need for "intellectual labor" --
> sufficient amounts of people who follow rules, play a game carefully,
> produce nothing but ensure their survival through creating obstacles,
> bureaucracy, etc. The most intellectual of their skill is to be able never
> to question, feel comfortable in a tie or white blouse, and be serious
> about making great deals purchasing more and more services and goods.
> Things middle class/intellectual laborees do not need are
> bookcases because
> .. books are contagious. My point is that though middle class wears white
> and its labor is called intellectual, their function is to
> consume, not think.
>
> Intelligentsia, on the contrary, is characterized, in my opinion, by a
> nearly sickening strive to think. Hippies seem for me closer to
> intelligentsia than a bank manager. By the way, a familiar add of
> Ameritrade with this weird guy look into a copy machine, reflects
> semantically my point. Many other groups (including wealthy
> internet-start-ups-creators and poor artists) are close to intelligentsia.
> But hardly middle class.
>
> Unfortunately, the structure of the society doesn't allow too
> many thinking
> people. It needs middle class. Our community, unfortunately, doesn't want
> to give thinking up and stubbornly discuss ideas instead of shopping in
> malls. Socially, however, most of us are required to identify ourselves as
> middle class (let me know if I am wrong). This creates an uncomfortable
> conflict that turned the discussion of middle class/intellectual
> labor into
> a history course of concentration camps.
>
> So, what do you think?
>
> Matvey Sokolovsky
> __________________________________________
> NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
> Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
> http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Mar 07 2000 - 17:53:59 PST