Jim D. says:
>I wrote: >>I don't see why we have to pay attention to _either_ the
>Incan conquest of
>other tribes _or_ the Spanish conquest of the Incas. Why not both?
>both are examples of
>class society.<<
>
>Louis answers: >Because Incan class society was relatively benign,
>while Spanish colonial
>class society was genocidal.<
>
>that's not answering the question.
>
>changing my question around, though we might say that capitalism is
>better than feudalism,
>why do we have to make a choice between them?
No need to make a "choice," especially since our making a "choice"
now doesn't change anything in history. Besides, one doesn't want to
suggest that today it is OK for the USA to invade relatively malign
societies though not relatively benign ones.
Engels says with regard to slavery:
***** It is very easy to inveigh against slavery and similar things
in general terms, and to give vent to high moral indignation at such
infamies. Unfortunately all that this conveys is only what everyone
knows, namely, that these institutions of antiquity are no longer in
accord with our present conditions and our sentiments, which these
conditions determine. But it does not tell us one word as to how
these institutions arose, why they existed, and what role they played
in history. (Engels, _Anti-Duhring_) *****
I think we should follow Engels's recommendation & study "how various
institutions arose, why they existed, and what role they played in
history." Such historical understanding helps us politically in the
present.
Yoshie
