Capitalism as slavery and colonialism

Xxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxx xxxxxxxx at xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
Thu Oct 26 14:58:55 MDT 2000


Funny. Explaining the growth of slavery/colonialism in _relation_ to the
development of capitalism in Europe is equal to *neo-malthusianism*or
*neo-malthusian factors*?  There is a serious mistake of confusing oranges and
apples here. Colonialism is part of the Malthusian ideology we are opposing here.
_Failing to take into account_ colonialism is a neo-malthusian/capitalist world
view, which is what Brenner and Wood subscribe.

That is how pots get distorted if one gives such a terrible reading of Lou's post
here.



Xxxx




Lou said:

> >I argue against the proposition that capitalism arose in England purely as
> >a consequence of internal factors uninfluenced by colonialism and slavery.
>

Yoshie said:

>
> The view that the emergence of capitalist social relations _cannot_
> be explained by the growth of commerce & trade, slavery &
> colonialism, and/or neo-Malthusian factors _alone_ is _not_ the same
> as a "proposition that capitalism arose in England purely as a
> consequence of internal factors uninfluenced by colonialism and
> slavery."
>
> Yoshie

--

Xxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxx
PhD Student
Department of Political Science
SUNY at Albany
Nelson A. Rockefeller College
135 Western Ave.; Milne 102
Albany, NY 12222



_____NetZero Free Internet Access and Email______
   http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html





More information about the Marxism mailing list