I agree; technically it should be the 5% or the 10% or even the 15%. But
that is why I referred to it as a metaphor, and as such it now names the
whole elite, independently of whether they actually belong to that 1%.

Those that we try to reach with such a slogan or those "on the verge" of
joining us. It's not an argument to persuade the skeptics or the enemy.
Movements are ink blots as it were,  growing at their edges, not reaching
out to those they can't reach anyhow.

And those on the edge, those we are reaching for, will accept the
metaphorical sense of the 1%.

Carrol



-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jim Devine
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 8:43 PM
To: Progressive Economics
Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Paul Farmer and the World Bank

Carrol Cox wrote:
> Probably the single greatest achievement of Occupy has been to popularize
> and give content to the metaphor of "The 1%." That allows the coinage of
so
> many agitational slogans that would otherwise be so difficult to
formulate.
> All one has to do is stick The 1% in a brief phrase and you have made much
> of your  argument before you even complete the phrase. For example:
>
> Resist The 1% attack on Democracy!
>
> Defend our homes against The 1%.
>
> Stop the War Making of The 1%.

while this makes total sense, the problem with the phrase "the 1 %" is
that it focuses on only the elite part of the ruling class rather than
that class as a whole, while missing the role of the social structure
that defines capitalism.
-- 
Jim Devine / "In science one tries to tell people, in such a way as to
be understood by everyone, something that no one ever knew before. But
in poetry, it's the exact opposite." -- Paul Dirac
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to