Private practitioners.

[JKP]

Private practitioners like some psychologists and social workers may not exploit labor, or own any capital, but they uniquely survive without selling their labour power to a capitalist.

How should we view them?

[cenv]

I'd say they're petty-bourgeois.

[Whitten]

Most are Petty-Bourgeois.

[anarchista feminista]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25, 2006 05:01 pm
Private practitioners like some psychologists and social workers may not exploit labor, or own any capital, but they uniquely survive without selling their labour power to a capitalist.

How should we view them?
I've come across some who genuinely want to help people. And in certain cases I've had to deal with them and I think if you find the right people they do alot of good.

[Janus]

It really depends on the type of psychologist since some of them do employ secretaries and others,etc but they can usually be classified as petit bourgeois.

Social workers, of course, is a much broader field. Some work for local authorities while others are volunteers so it really depends on the type.

[JKP]

Originally posted by anarchy_oi+December 06, 2006 06:56 pm--> (anarchy_oi @ December 06, 2006 06:56 pm)
[email protected] 25, 2006 05:01 pm
Private practitioners like some psychologists and social workers may not exploit labor, or own any capital, but they uniquely survive without selling their labour power to a capitalist.

How should we view them?
I've come across some who genuinely want to help people. And in certain cases I've had to deal with them and I think if you find the right people they do alot of good. [/b]
It's not about whether they're nice people who help others; capitalists do philanthropic work sometimes as well. It's the class relationship that they occupy which matters, not the individual itself.