Of course "historical materialism" as a label is empty. I see Sweezy's "the
present as history," Marx's "The anatomy of man is a key to the anatomy of
the ape," and Luxemburg's "The final goal is everything, the movement is
nothing" as key to grasping historical materialism as a method. Jim Blaut
was a devoted revolutionary and committed to the struggle for human freedom,
but he was definitely not a historial materialist.

Carrol

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jim Devine
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 8:06 PM
To: Progressive Economics
Subject: Re: [Pen-l] David Graeber on capitalism and unfree labor

me:
>> so what's the theory behind that assertion? or is it an empirical
>> generalization?

Louis P:
> Historical materialism.

since I also apply historical materialism, that doesn't say anything
about why you disagree with me.
-- 
Jim Devine / "An atheist is a man who has no invisible means of
support." -- John Buchan
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to