[PEN-L:11609] Re: Re: Empiricism, was Re: UK Agricultural Revolution

["Max B. Sawicky" <sawicky@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> 550  Sawicky. Where do you get this "capitalism itself is
>      not a stage of historical progress, relative to
>      feudalism." You don't get it from me. But saying it

No I get it from others here.  I didn't say I got it from you,
did I?

>      gives you a chance to sneer at revolutionsary efforts
>      in the Third world, so I understand and forgive. And

No you don't understand.  I was not referring to actual struggles.
I was referring to certain understandings of them by 1st world
people.  This was also the burden of Wojtek's remark, IMO.
I glimpse a device periodically resorted to -- criticism of a
person's thought is translated into an attack on oppressed
peoples.  In this case, I was not criticizing your thought.
As I said in my post,
I have to abstain from the debate you were in since I don't
know anything about it, but the underlying politics are
another matter.

>      precisely how does anti-imperialism hinder struggles
>      in the developed capitalist countries? Lou might have
>      a word or two to say about that. Also Charles, Carrol,

It need not, but it can.

It can hinder by insisting on the irrelevance, if not the reactionary
character, of the working class in the U.S.  I wasn't accusing you
of that, but it's an obvious tendency on this list.

cheers,

mbs