====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
In a message dated 1/2/2010 12:32:31 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, markala...@gmail.com writes: >> In other words, slavery in the Southern US was awful, but much better than it was in some other places at other times. Or, Jefferson Davis may have had no use for black people, but Abraham Lincoln was a "racist," too. Both these comparative approaches are utterly dishonest and deceptive attempts to put what was (and, in some respects, still is) the dominant interest in the US ruling class in its best possible light.<< Comment Assessing "the role of the individual in/as history" is extremely complex, difficult, partisan and ideological. Sharp differences arise over articulating the role of Elvis Presley in the evolution of popular music in America. Elvis - (for me, and it is always "for me" even when the "me" is a political part), emerges as the individual to personify a moment in history. All the complex phenomena of his "period of time," is expressed, or rather can be compressed, in Elvis as a bookmark. Karl Marx is no different in this sense. Also Michael Jackson . Huge divergence concerning Jackson’s bookmark as history and assessing his life as an individual emerged before he was placed in the ground. Discourse riveted to the individual proves their bookmark as history. One can more than less summarize environments, (also a partisan and ideological endeavor), only to confront a complex of individual events and actions shaping and motivating the individual, whose life force drives them to become a historical bookmark. At the end of the day, Lincoln emerged as the embodiment of a victorious collective will sufficient to win the war in favor of the political strivings of "Northern capital." One can argue and subject any number of his decisions and polices to critique. Lincoln’s wartime leadership and generals can be dissected and studied forever, without in anyway altering the fact that he won. Lincoln’s generals and soldiers defeated the armies of Southern reaction. Lincoln’s greatness is proven by the fact he emerged as paramount leader, at a redefining moment in our history, where our history under went redefinition. All the complex phenomena of the Civil War years - and the period leading to Lincoln’s election, is expressed, or rather can be compressed, in Lincoln the individual. One can always speculate over "what should have happened," or "what could have happened," if a countless list of possible scenarios is used as a frame of reference. History does not lend itself to such retroactive unraveling and reconstitution except as speculation. In the end one is confronted with what actually happened, and the context - environments, in which what happened did in fact happen. When the proletariat seizes control of its history and studies its history as an emancipated and educated self governing mass, its choices, motivated by a society conception of change and choice can alter history going forward. That is why humanity has studied "the generations" forever. WL. (http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm) ________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
