(fwd from Melvin P) Reply to primitive accumulation

Les Schaffer schaffer at optonline.net
Sat Aug 30 11:19:10 MDT 2003

> Leon Trotsky described the process of the development of capitalist
> industry existing side-by-side as a hybrid with ancient modes of
> production with his concept of "unequal and combined development",
> it meant, that the old modes of production were suddenly confronted
> with the most advanced industrial technology, that capitalist
> industry existed side-by-side with the ancient Russian mirs in the
> Russian empire, a fact of enormous political and cultural importance
> for a modernisation strategy.<


Why is the question of primitive accumulation of capital as
constituting the pre-history of capital formation - according to Marx,
even important? I have re subscribed to Marxline and will answer this
question exhaustively in the next couple of days.

I believe you give Mr. Trotsky a very bad reputation by interpreting
what you think he wrote rather that presenting what was written. The
uneven or unequal combined development of any social process is by
definition uneven and combined. That is to say transition from one
economic and social formation is by definition unequal and
combined. What this means is that new economic and social formations,
at every stage of human history, becomes a systemic and world wide
social relations on the basis of imperial intrusion and authority.

In the realm of philosophy this is called the process of
sublating. Sublating as a living process of economic and social change
cannot take place all at the same time. In laymen terms a new or
different economic and social process arises on the basis of
pre-exiting phenomenon. That is to say a new qualitative configuration
emerges or is injected into a pre-existing economic and social
formation and causes a change and acceleration of change in the old
economic and social formation. The change from one set of economic and
social relations do not happen all at one time and occurs somewhere in
a definite geographic location and in this sense people speak of a
change wave. A change wave means uneven and combined development.

The political meaning of uneven and combined development, as it takes
place on the basis of concrete economic and social differences is a
somewhat different concept than the spontaneous uneven and combined
economic development and emergence of distinct property relations in
human history.

Marxism in America has advance beyond the formulation "the development
of capitalist industry" because it properly belongs to the last
generation of Marxists. Rather what is spoken of is the development
and evolution of industrial production on the basis of the bourgeois
property relations. The latter formulation embodies the law of value,
as it exists in America as this specific juncture of history.

Marx of course explains the impact of the development of manufacture
and industry on the basis of the bourgeois property relations as it
impact the less developed peoples and areas of the world in the
Communist Manifesto. Marx of course writes exhaustively and in details
on the meaning of primitive accumulation of capital.

You have written that winning the lottery and prostitution can serves
as the primitive accumulation of capital or an indication of the
primitive accumulation of capital in America in August 2003. I
apologise for laughing at this theory of genitals as a historical
force that causes the decay of one historically evolved social and
economic formation - and with it the social and economic classes
riveting society to a definable framework, while accelerating the
emergence of new technology, classes and further evolving the
commodity form.

By stripping Marx meaning of the primitive accumulation of capital
from its historical period as process logic of the formation of the
social power of capital and the bourgeois property relations and
further stating that capital reproduction is basically primitive
accumulation - and then writing in a way to attribute this to "someone
else" of a historical character and statue is wrong.  This is why I
could not stop laughing.

Brother, this has nothing to do with Mr. Trotsky, Lenin, Stalin,
Ernest Mandel or Rosa Luxemburg but what Marx wrote and why he
described the primitive accumulation of capital as a distinct
historical process that precede the formation of the capitalist class.

The primitive accumulation of capital leads to a distinct economic,
social and class formation radically different than the latter stages
of capital reproduction. The former creates a working class and
capitalist - the bourgeois property relations and develops the law of
value or the commodity form of the social product. The latter stages
of capital reproduction unravel the law of value and accelerate the
unraveling of the commodity form; obliterates the entire distinct
sections of the capitalist class - the industrial capitalist are an
example, and prepares the ground for communism on the basis of the
transition from industrial production to electro-computer society or
post industrial society.

More later, once I stop laughing. Prostitution in Detroit - yesterday
and today is not a form of "original accumulation of capital."

Melvin P. :-)

More information about the Marxism mailing list