Just to make something clear
dmschanoes at earthlink.net
Thu Jul 10 08:20:46 MDT 2003
One more thing, your statement:
"and in fact the progressiveness of the Northern cause lay not
> only -and in a sense not even firstly- in abolition but in rejection
> of the Southern attempt to turn the United States into a British
> colony again by extending slavery in order to strengthen the link
> between King Cotton and King Coal"
is just plain wrong. The progressive nature was solely in the destruction
of slavery. That destruction is what freed Northern capitalism from the
boundaries of the archaic social relations supported by slavery. Neither
the South nor Britain had any illusions about turning the Union into a
colony of Britain.
Your attempt to state that the progressive nature was firstly, or mostly, in
the North's defeat of the attempt to reduce the US to colonial status is
simply a substitution of bourgeois nationalism for the real social content
of the revolution, a result clearly of your ahistorical obsession with the
"progressive" nature of nationalism.
While you think your service as an imperialist politician gives you special
insights (oh by the way, I served imperialism too, a little unwillingly, and
my special insights involved hauling my sorry ass- as fast as I could -away
from the guys chasing me), I think it has severly, perhaps permanently
impaired your ability to distinguish history from personal fantasy.
With best wishes for your continued progress in teaching Marxist analysis,
More information about the Marxism