"The laws of history have nothing in common with apedantic schematism"
CharlesB at SPAMCNCL.ci.detroit.mi.us
Tue Nov 28 14:31:17 MST 2000
>>> cbcox at ilstu.edu 11/28/00 10:00AM >>>
This would have made a perfect Preface to the *Brenner Debate*. It provides
a perfect theoretical context for Brenner's thesis on the origins of
primary error of most attacks on Brenner is that they assume some relationship
between priority and superiority. Trotsky makes clear the silliness of such
CB: Except most of the criticisms on these lists of Brenner's thesis have not been in
error. What is Brenner's position on what Marx says about the issues in Brenner's
thesis ? That is the question that defenders of Brenner won't answer, and their
silence is very telling.
Undoubtedly, of course, there are defenders of the Brenner thesis who make
this same silly assumption. But it is false, deeply false and racist,
of what conclusion anyone derives from it. Most historians and theorists who
can be legitimately accused of eurocentrism make this assumption -- and
Jim Blaut's critique of them is accurate. It is too bad, however, that he
accepts their basic premise.
More information about the Marxism