Re: Mercantilism: Britain & Spain (was Re: the role of forced labor)

[Xxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxx <xxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:

> Xxxx:
>
> >Plus, you still haven't replied my question on Navigation Acts. This means 
> >how
> >useful the discussion is with you. Only chatting and intellectual name
> >dropping! That is it!
>
> You mean this question?
>
> >At 1:33 AM -0500 11/26/00, Xxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxx wrote:
> >Furthermore, if the abolishment of navigation acts gradually
> >undermined slavery in 1848, as you claimed, then why was there was
> >slavery in the US till 1865?
>
> >The claim that Eric Williams makes is not that "the abolition >of
> >navigation acts gradually undermined slavery in 1848"; his >argument
> >is as follows:
>

I was *not* asking what Eric Williams was thinking. I was asking your own 
opinion,
briefly.

You said that "The doctrine of laissez faire did not come to be put into 
_practice_
until later" (meaning 1848). What should we deduce from your statement with 
respect
to chattel slavery?


Xxxx


I said:

>>in the 18th century slaves were still the charectertic of labor force in
>Caribbean Islands when the doctrine of laissez faire was already
>developing.

Yoshis replied:

>The doctrine of laissez faire did not come to be put into _practice_
until later.  For instance, the Navigation Laws -- "the very heart
and core of the colonial system" (Eric Williams, _Capitalism &
Slavery_, p. 168) -- remained until _1848_.


--

Xxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxx
PhD Student
Department of Political Science
SUNY at Albany
Nelson A. Rockefeller College
135 Western Ave.; Milne 102
Albany, NY 12222



_____NetZero Free Internet Access and Email______
   http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html