[Fwd: [PEN-L:11354] Re: Capitalist development]

[Carrol Cox <cbcox@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Again, note that while Lou believes that I don't understand what was
at issue, I believe that he doesn't understand what was at issue. In
other words, we disagree sharply on what we disagree on.

Carrol

X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Message-ID: <37E694E7.AEAC0FFA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1999 15:11:19 -0500
From: Carrol Cox <cbcox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PEN-L:11354] Re: Capitalist development
References: <2F1E8604CA0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



Ricardo Duchesne wrote:

>  Of course, in the 'introductory comment', Wood
> rhetorically tries to play it both ways - keeping the Monthly Review
> crowd happy - writing "its [of the colonies] contribution to the
> development of capitalism can't be explained without explaining the
> new, internal dynamic of England's domestic capitalism".

O.K. Now Ricardo reveals himself as a mere ideologue, since he too
is intent on confusing the origins and growth of capitalism, and to twist
things to his particular ideological perspective he has to engage in
clumsy badmouthing of Wood. Of course her writing is political --
as is any intellectually respectable writing in 1999.

Carrol