In a message dated 3/19/2010 10:20:08 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, cb31...@gmail.com writes:
Is the difference between "antagonism" and " contradiction" that antagonism is irreconcilable, but contradiction is reconcilable ? There were some other new classes in the new bourgeois system besides the bourgeoisie and the proletariat - slaves and colonial subjects. The new forces and relations of production in antagonism with the feudal order included colonialism and slavery as well as wage-labor/capital. Marx says that colonialism and slavery were " the chief momenta of primitive accumulation." Reply 1. The concept of antagonistic and non-antagonistic contradictions is not put forth in the glossary, with no disrespect meant to the Soviet "Textbook of Marist Philosophy" or Mao’s writings on "Contradiction." Antagonism is not contradiction. Antagonism is a form of resolution of the contradiction between more than less static relations of production and mobile productive forces. Here is how Marx writes this: 5). At a certain stage of their development, 6). the material productive forces of society 7). come into conflict with the existing relations of production or – (this merely expresses the same thing in legal terms ) with the property relations within the framework of which they have operated up until then. 8). From forms of development of the productive forces 9). these relations turn into their fetters. 10). Then begins an epoch of social revolution.. (1859 Preface to A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy) _http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1859/critique-pol-economy/preface.htm_ (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1859/critique-pol-economy/preface.htm) Antagonism is how a society rent with class contradiction, leaps to a qualitative new mode of production. The form of resolution takes place as the wiping out, destruction or liquidation of the old classes connected to the old means of production. The serf form of servitude, as a property relations - landed property, and founded on hand labor and early manufacturing, is liquidated from history on the basis of a development of new productive forces and new social relations that correspond to the new means of production. 2). Agree with the second part of the issue. The problem of a glossary is isolating what is fundamental. Thus, an index called "fundamentality" is part of the glossary. Then there is an index titled "primitive accumulation." I swear I am going to send you the draft before it is completed and professionally edited. If you know a professional editor, preferably a comrade let me know and they can be paid a stipend. "Forces of destruction" is not an "index" although included in crisis of capital as overproduction and the destruction of commodities and means of production. Charles, swear to God gonna holla before the month is out but been on jam. Yet, no way we could leave out "primitive accumulation of capital." Again, this is written for folks with zero understanding of anything remotely Marx. But they are flocking to any center of gravity with new thinking that express what they see and feel. WL. _______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
