Just to make something clear
dmschanoes at earthlink.net
Thu Jul 10 06:11:56 MDT 2003
Comrade JF writes:
"Through much of the 19th century, the US was
arguably an economic colony of Great Britain"
I disagree with that. The problem with that sort of
analysis is that you have expanded a category,
"economic colony" to such a degree to accommodate
a social development that the category itself loses
all meaning, all definition, all relevance, all
Certainly the economic weight of Britain made itself
felt everywhere in the world market, but it did not
reduce all countries to colonial status. The com-
mercial ties between the US and Britain were just
that, commercial ties, and not diktats. The US was
certainly not a colony like Trinidad was a colony, or
Barbados was a colony, like the colonial adventures
of Britain anywhere else in the most critical aspect: the
The US economy was not developed, developing,
organized for the benefit of the British economy.
The import of capital and expertise, particularly in
the development of railroads was part of the overall
development of US capitalism and certainly does not
retard its growth in that such capital was used to
develop the internal, domestic markets, link city
and countryside, and establish a base for industry.
That is not the colonial experience.
I am not sorry to say specificity is essential and the
devil, for those of a religious bent, is in the details.
More information about the Marxism