Re: A POST on Post, and vice versa

["dmschanoes" <dmschanoes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

LP: It is a theory of the origins of  capitalism that posits the need for
market relations in the countryside especially in labor. In other words, the
North sought to impose these  progressive class relations on the
"precapitalist" South.
_____________

DMS:  The second sentence does not follow automatically from your first.  It
is  possible that the very same "theory" will be able to account for the
various manifestions and manifest variations based on concrete analysis of
the actual history.  It is also possible that an attempt to impose
progressive class relations was made, AND FAILED, was defeated, for equally
concrete, historical, propertied reasons. See for example, the program of
the "radical reconstructionists."  Victory does not automatically preclude
reversal.
___________________________________
 LP: Didn't I already tell you that this confirms my argument, not Post's?
Didn't you read my reply to you?
_________________
DMS:  Your second statement does not follow automatically from your first.
You already know I read EVERYTHING you write, Louis.  And your first
statement is inaccurate.  The ability of former slaves to migrate disproves
your thesis.  Have you forgotten that the war was ostensibly about a union?
________________________

Have no idea who "Prof down with Fidel" is.  Is that pertinent to anything?
Or is it purely personal?


Hugs and fugs,
dms