PEN-L
mailing list archive

Other Periods  | Other mailing lists  | Search  ]

Date:  [ Previous  | Next  ]      Thread:  [ Previous  | Next  ]      Index:  [ Author  | Date  | Thread  ]

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: Re: No agrarian revo?



Mark, please cut the crackpot stuff.  I think that Jim is wrong about the
fuel-analysis of C. 1, but for a different reason.  He wanted to show the
importance of capitalist accumulation.  Putting stuff about primitive
accumulation in the beginning would suggest that you could elmimate the
"unfair" stuff and have a "good" capitalism.

On Sat, Jun 16, 2001 at 12:47:14AM +0100, Mark Jones wrote:
> Jim Devine:
>
> > Marx's theory in volume I of CAPITAL can be summarized as saying that
> > "fuel" from the looting of the New World, etc. allowed the "engine" of
> > proletarianization (i.e., capitalism) to run and grow, starting in the
> > English countryside and then spreading to the cities (and then
> > the world).
> > Brenner (and thus Wood) analyze the engine and add theoretical and
> > historical detail, taking the "fuel" for granted and not denying
> > its role.
> > Wood is more one-sided than Brenner in her presentation, though,
> > stressing
> > only the "engine."
>
> This is a misreading of Marx, and a serious distortion of Brenner/Wood who,
> far from supporting the thesis that capital was from the beginning a global
> dynamic, try very hard to sustain the exact opposite: that capitalism
> occurred uniquely in the English countryside and sperad from there. In Cap I
> Marx is careful to separate out accumulation logic from the historical
> genesis of capitalism; trying to locate both things in the English
> countryside stands this careful differentiation on its head, and negates
> Marx's own historical methodology. Marx was a materialist.
>
> >My main point is that it's wrong to dismiss people's views as
> > "crackpot" unless you immediately justify such name-calling.
>
> To stand Marx on his head and then claim to be true to Marx is crackpot at
> best. But what is important in this discussion, as you rightly say, is to
> ground theory in concrete historical investigation. There should be less
> opinionation and more factual spadework.
>
> Mark Jones
>

--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929

Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




Other Periods  | Other mailing lists  | Search  ]