[PEN-L:11626] RE: binary passions

["Charles Brown" <CharlesB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Max's concern might be addressed like this: Capitalism is a qualitative change from the prior modes of production (division of labor of capitalism = wage-labor + white supremacism/colonialism). However, capitalism is a class exploitative mode of production , and in this regard it continues the class exploitation of previous modes of production not only in Europe but in China, West Africa, Peru, etc.

Seems to me the history of the last fifty years , replete with national liberation revolutions in the "Third World" which were not sufficient to end capitalism, demonstrates that revolution within the Euro-American capitalist countries by especially white workers is a without-which-not for this big change , not only the end of capitalism , but the end of class exploitative societies of all times. Engels and Marx often noted this special characteristic of the communist revolution.

Workers of the West, especially white workers, it's our turn.

Charles Brown


>>> Max Sawicky <sawicky@xxxxxxxxxx> 09/23/99 12:41PM >>>
I don't understand why it's not possible to think that the
combination of internal changes within Europe plus imperialism
combined to produce capitalism as we know it. Why is such a
passionate matter of either/or dispute?
Doug
>>>>>

Looks to me like the subtext to the essentiality of
colonialism argument is that capitalism itself is
not a stage of historical progress, relative to
its predecessors, but merely a different form of
the same underlying misery and oppression.

No progress means little scope for reform, plus
the irrelevance of the working class in the
industrialized countries, particularly white
workers in the U.S.  Ergo the implied
necessity of third-worldist revolution.
Lin Pao (sp?) and Che are still with us.
Morbid symptoms and all that.

mbs