>Yoshie:
>>There is no contradiction between (A) the thesis that the origin of
>>capitalism lies in the transformation of social property relations in
>>the English countryside and (B) the development of modern slavery &
>>other forms of unfree labor used in production of commodities on the
>>periphery _for_ the capitalist world market.
>
>I quite honestly don't understand what you are trying to say.
>
>>What do you think caused B if not A? If you say colonialism, what
>>caused colonialism? The evil character of White Man? Greed at the
>>heart of Human Nature?
>
>What caused colonialism? Don't you know that I don't answer questions like
>these. I don't remember when you began to pose Socratic one-liners like
>this. Naughty-naughty.
>
>Louis Proyect
The point of the debate is to understand (1) what caused capitalism
(a mode of production unlike any previous one, with its own distinct
laws of motion); (2) what caused modern colonialism, chattel slavery,
imperialism, maldevelopment of the periphery, etc. to arise; & (3)
what caused the end of chattel slavery & various old forms of modern
colonialism while at the same time giving rise to neo-colonialism
under the aegis of Pax Americana -- with an assumption that an
accurate grasp of history may help us in political struggles.
Otherwise, the debate on the origin of capitalism is merely of an
antiquarian interest.
Yoshie
