Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
I have to say that I am in disagreement with you over what seems to be an opposition to classification and collectivist thinking.  

If it hadn't been for collectivist thinking we wouldn't have had a labour opposition against abusive factory owners at the turn of the 20th century, we wouldn't have had revolts by an organized underclass (We) against oppressive regimes (Them) in the past, (and hopefully in the future), and we wouldn't have been able to organize an opposition against countries that attack other countries in the past, in the present and hopefully in the future.  

Yes, everything can of course be abused, also a collectivist thinking, but there is no need, in my opinion, to oppose to the idea of a collectivist thinking, a prerequisite for organizing opposition and a powerful political tool, just because it can be abused.  

Bitsofnews.com Giving you the latest bits.

by Gjermund E Jansen (gjans1@hotmail.com) on Thu Nov 23rd, 2006 at 01:09:00 PM EST
It's an objection to inappropriate use of classifications.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Thu Nov 23rd, 2006 at 01:23:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]
True enough, but the gist (or one of them anyway) from this comment thread seems that collective terms are practically a standard product of box-thinking, a useful concept during human history, yet if you'd start to look at classifications critically, far too many are essentially inadequate. Wrong usage becomes practically a given and abuse becomes an easy side-effect by the phenomeneon. I'm reminded of kcurie and the need for a narrative - it's part of the package. You can fight it, I doubt you can change it.
by Nomad (Bjinse) on Fri Nov 24th, 2006 at 06:30:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]


Top Diaries

Occasional Series