Re: [Marxism] Re: Pomeranz

[Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>]

Fred wrote:
> Pomeranz's points are very interesting, but I note a peculiar phrase.
> He points to Europe's "access to the abundance of the New World." The
> New World was discovered by Europe because of their desire for trade
> routes to India. Why did Chinese civilization not feel the same drive to
> conquer the developing markets of Europe, even though they had trade
> with Europe, mostly at Europe's initiative.
>
> What denied China "access" to this wealth?  What barred them from
> contending for it?

You certainly can't blame the "Asiatic Mode of Production" for lack of
colonial ambition since the Ottoman Empire would control a vast empire
despite being classified--erroneously--by Marx in this fashion.

> Absence of white racism? Lack of military skill?  Absence of spirit of
> plunder? Were they unable to develop shipping capable of developing
> shipping and sailors capable of making the trip?  Was the trip that much
> longer? Were they that much further from the riches of Peru, for
> example, than Spain?

Well, the whole purpose of these early European voyages was to be able to
trade with China and India without the hassles of dealing with Middle
Eastern middle-men. Remember Marco Polo? So, should China have embarked on
risky sea voyages to discover itself? In any case, China had a vaster fleet
than Columbus's in the early 1400s and sailed to the east coast of Africa
under the leadership of Zheng He, the eunuch admiral. These voyages were
discontinued not because the Chinese lacked ambition but because of
internal political crises in China that had nothing to do with Oriental
Despotism.

> Did gold count for as much with the Chinese ruling classes as it did for
> the hungry exploiters of FEUDAL Europe?  And if not, why?

Yes, it did.

> I look forward to reading Pomerantz, but I suspect that he is making
> legitimate denials of distinctions -- China had trade, China had
> weavers, China was dynamic, China was developing technically, China had
> property in land, China had a rising civilization, etc. etc. -- in order
> to deny real historical difference.  Not racial differences, not
> difference in level of civilization, not differences in intellectual or
> technical capacity, not a difference in enterprise and creativity, not a
> "lower" culture and so on.

You should read Jim Blaut first. Pomeranz doesn't really approach the topic
from the perspective of Marxism. In particular, you should read the chapter
on John A. Hall in "8 Eurocentric Historians".

>>Blaut challenges John A. Hall's Powers and Liberties: The Cause and
Consequences of the Rise of the West (1985) for its supposition that
capitalism can be waylaid by "obstacles." Traditional societies such as
China, says Hall, were simultaneously too weak to provide an infrastructure
that would foster commerce and so strong that they inhibited growth. He
found that the instability in Islamic and Hindu governments constrained
markets and hindered the organic change that occurred in Europe and would
have occurred elsewhere if not for those blockages. Blaut counters with
accusations of stereotyping and denials that Indian society was
priest-ridden and incapable of the dynamism on which capitalism thrives.
"Strong Indian states were the norm" (p. 134), he avers, and caste was not
divisive. Moslem economies were not universally pastoral, their soil was
poor, their people were tribal, their cultures were lacking
differentiation. The voyages of the famed Admiral Zheng came to a halt not
because of any "coercion" from an oppressive government but because their
purpose of reinforcing tributary relationships "had been accomplished" (p.
131). The failure of the same government to shut down private commerce
proves, to Blaut, that it did not play the oppressive role attributed to it.<<

full: http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/jwh/14.1/br_8.html


________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism