Marx’s theory of class struggle can legitimately be understood as a response to the problem of collective agency in capitalist societies. However, the initial formulation of a theoretical (or, indeed, empirical) response to a problem may in certain respects be problematic: it may partake of an essentialist form of reasoning or may be ensnared in a reductionist framework. The aim of deconstruction in this regard is to lay bare these sorts of ambiguities and exclusions, thus weakening any essentializing projections into the concept and/or exploring repressed possibilities foreclosed by reductionist proclivities. It may turn out, for example, that class struggles are only one form of collective agency amongst others; indeed, its particular embodiment may be overdetermined by other forms of struggle and identity, such as race, gender or ethnicity. If this is the case (which we think it is), then a practice of commensuration is required to rework the theoretical concept so as to render it compatible with our ontological presuppositions, while the practice of articulation involves its reinscription in a new explanatory framework (181).