Colonial Latin America (Xxxx)
juliohuato at hotmail.com
Sat Jun 9 19:46:30 MDT 2001
Xxxx Xxxxxx <xxxxxxxxxx at xxxxxxxxx.xxx>:
>As Marx says, imperialism _exploits and plunders_
>but does not transform.
>Take the example of Mexico's rural latifundista's
>class (large landholders). Latifundistas was a ***"function of world wide
>economic conditions, starting in the colonial period with the exploitation
>of cheap labor for the mines or for direct export to the metropolises.
Latifundistas (large landholders) was 'a function'? Not a group of people,
a class, something like that?
Latifundistas exploited 'cheap labor' OR 'for direct export to the
metropolises'? What do you mean 'or'? Either one or the other? Not both?
Silver was extracted from those mines with cheap labor for domestic use? If
it was sent abroad, then they used expensive labor?
>Latifundismo is not a matter of mechanical transplant of feudalism from
>the old world to the new world . The hacienda was a notably a prosperous
>business enterprise based on labor repressive systems and the high value of
>land and its products.
Are you talking about colonial Mexico or late 19th century-early 20th
century Mexico? One of the bases of the hacienda was the high value of
land? Do you mean the high price of land? Was the high price of the land a
basis for the hacienda? Was the price of products in the world or domestic
market really so high as to make holding large plots of highly-priced land
(according to you) economical or profitable?
>Even after a major agrarian reform in Mexico in the
>1930s , latifundismo renewed its vigorous development when demand from the
>metropolis for food imports during world war 2 triggered a commercial
>response in Mexico's country side.by 1970, half of mexico's peasants were
>once again landless and today a small class of large land owners
>monopolizes Mexico's agribusiness.
Mexican 'latifundismo' after the 1930's was of an entirely different sort.
After the 1930's, production in a portion of the privately-owned farms
required large plots of land. But that doesn't mean that the mode of
production was the same as in pre-revolutionary latifundios. It wasn't the
same technically and it wasn't the same socially.
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
More information about the Marxism