Re: [Marxism] The Brenner thesis and L* P*

["rrubinelli" <rrubinelli@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

In this case, it isn't the critics of Brenner, it's the happy
capitalists, the Panglossian marketeers, arguing that capitalism is the
most perfect, the most natural condition, the "goal" to which all human
beings would naturally strive toward.

Try historical specificity.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Brown" <cbrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 6:25 PM
Subject: [Marxism] The Brenner thesis and L* P*


>
> Could y'all elaborate on the difference between "historicity of
capitalism"
> and capitalism "naturally" emerging ?
>
> Does "naturally" mean biologically ?
>
> If so, critics of Brenner don't explain the emergence of capitalism by
> biology. They explain it by a different historicity.  Brenner's thesis
is
> not uniquely historicizing.  Marx's thesis historicizes the origin of
> capitalism too. Marx is famous for that.
>
>


________________________________________________
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