Re: A class analysis

[Louis N Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 12 Apr 1996, boddhisatva wrote:

>       My point was that the underdeveloped proletariat is plundering those
> natural resources they have under their control.

Louis: Underdeveloped proletariat? What's that? Underweight miners? You
are so incoherent that you can't even put together the arguments that
will get you to phase two of your analysis, let alone a conclusion. The
proletariat nowhere in the world has "natural resources" under its
control. The proletariat by definition owns nothing but its labor power.
Perhaps you are referring to peasants who in many cases don't follow
"green" practices. The problem is not with these folks, it is with
agribusiness. Agribusiness owns most of the land in Mexico, for example,
and is wasting it on export production of flowers and tomatoes for
the North American dining table. That land should be used to feed the
people of Mexico.

> capitalist interest, except when it doesn't hold up.  My point is that the
> idea that the third world proletariat are poor because the bourgeoisie takes
> their natural resources is wrong.
>

Louis: No, they are poor because they receive low wages. Low wages is the
cause of poverty.


     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---