[PEN-L:7408] Re: Re: Capitalist Trade

["J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." <rosserjb@xxxxxxx>]

Seth,
     I'm holding....
     You don't think the French fur traders were not
out to accumulate capital and did not "commodify
and labor"?  They were and they did.
Barkley Rosser
-----Original Message-----
From: Seth Sandronsky <ssandron@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, May 28, 1999 2:44 PM
>Subject: [PEN-L:7406] Re: Capitalist Trade


>      French long lots are "feudal" and square-grids are
>"capitalistic"?   Give me a break.
>       The French long lots simply guarantee that everybody
>has access to the main transportation route, which was
>rivers in French North America.  The idea is that people
>would be trading.  Pretty capitalistic.
>
>Barkeley,
>
>Hold on.  Trading doesn't equal capitalism.  For a long time, people traded
>without a capitalist market.  It's worth repeating that the market (trade)
>used to be a part of society instead of the opposite relationship that
holds
>today.  As Ellen Meiksins Wood and others (Polyani, for one) point out,
>capitalist trade is unique, with specific social relations between owners
>and producers tethered to a market that commodifies land and labor in the
>drive to accumulate capital.
>
>Regards,
>Seth Sandronsky
>
>      The origin of the square grid was Roman urban
>planning (also seen independently in the layout of
>Beijing).  It was Thomas Jefferson who imposed the
>square grid in the Northwest Territories Ordinance drawing
>on the classical model.  Capitalistic?  Not any more
>particularly than the French long lots.
>Barkley Rosser
>
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
>
>