Summing up and vice versa, OR, things that make you go hmm..

Sat Jul 12 13:12:05 MDT 2003

In a message dated 7/12/03 8:08:04 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
dmschanoes at writes:

As the discussion moves through the history, traces in its own way the
ambiguities of capital, we get to the impact of the US Civil War, the
conflict between the means and relations of production, and the position,
which I still hold,  that the US Civil War was about development of productive
forces where capital had come into conflict with an integral component of its
own social relations.

And then, comrade MP, with whom I've had strenuous, to put it mildly, almost
throw down disagreements,  unleashes a lightning bolt that illuminates the
whole area and when he states simply and directly-- slavery in the US in the 19th
century was NOT primitive or initial accumulation but capitalist
reproduction-- and in so doing he locates the once and future regressiveness of capital
not only or simply in its inability to accomplish the "democratic tasks" of the
bourgeois revolution, but in capital's own reproduction, where the
reproduction and maintenance of "archaic forms" of landed property is essential to the
dominance of private property in its advanced forms, a maintenance and support,
by the way which is continuously disrupted by
capital's own demands for access to detached "free" labor.

I think we can draw many important assessments about "national struggles,"
"self-determination," and "imperialism" based on MP's direct evaluation.

This transformation in the role and analysis of slavery is the thing that
makes me go hmmm..., at first.


It has only been in the last 36 - 48 months that what I really understand
what I thought I understood thirty years ago - or really understand as history
logic, that appears within the mind as a living motion picture - not in black
and white, but color. Indigenousness groups of real American communist in the
South are going to have a lot to say about what we think is the "Southern
Question" and I am going to shut-up. In this regard I tend to read Stan Goff -
stuff, and give it the benefit of the doubt unless it is clear political economy
cited by Marx.

The "Southern Colonial Question" has in the past century been expressed as
the Negro Question but the decay in the national factor is recasting the
question in its historical presentation - to a degree. Today all of our discussion
are way ahead of the curve.

I do have an earnest desire to unravel the baggage of yesteryear but fine it
impossible under conditions when everything about the past communist movement
and the Third International is betrayal, reaction and the fault of one man.
When Mr. L. Trotsky calls his "followers" scoundrels in respects to the Negro
Question, I use this word in the same manner, because it comes from the giants
and comrades tend to act like imperial scoundrels - not racist.

I'll fight anyone for calling a comrade on Marxline a racist and got kicked
off of Marxline when a scoundrel was labeled a racist and I became very vulgar.
How can we blame others for our own - my, collective weaknesses? In history I
was more than less like I am now - an imperial worker, who with years grow

Actually, this question of language Trotsky raises with the American comrades
hit me like a lightening bolt. He basically states, "I have not studied this
question, but you guys have got to be kidding." In 1933 who in America could
really understand that on the basis of language the national question was
unraveled and the subsequent decay of the national factor that would begin to
unfold seventy years later? In the main the Marxist movement in American is not at
the theory level of the 1930 Bolsheviks - including Trotsky.

The national question is tricky, but the Anglo-American proletariat already
understands the South is "backwards" and the origin of the term "white trash"
is a derogatory depiction of the poor southern white than has today been
transformed into the term white "trailer trash," which no longer draws a distinction
between the lowest sector of the working class North and South that is white.
Even here the decay of the national factor is apparent.

This you man - M&M, the white rapper from Detroit is not a phony but the real
thing. He is not a concoction and he is good . . . real good. He does not
pretend he is not white and do not pretend he is black. He is this stage of the
decay of the national factor. The younger generation don't give a damn about
what we think and they are historically correct.

Marx thing on slavery is ultra heavy, yet simple.

Here is why Engels addresses him as "Hey Black" or "Dear Moor" in his May
1862 letter. It does not get any better than that. Every time I do Marx and
Engels Correspondence I laugh my ass off at what Engels probably edited out of the

Comrade DMS, back around 1994 during the annual celebration of African
American History month, a handful of us made Engels an honorary African American.
The award did not go to Marx because he was already "Moor."

Wait time I hit the composition of the working class whose cutting edge was
once the Slavic workers out of Eastern Europe. No one remembers that the Slavic
workers occupied the same "social relations" the black workers would inherit
- slums and structures of power, that the Irish and German workers - and to a
degree the Jewish workers in Detroit, once occupied. Man we were born into
some crap and had our first base of support in Pole-Town (Polish Town) and had to
overthrow a Polish bureaucracy in the local union.

Like . . . the Polish minority workers are the last workers in America that
needed to come under assault. Part of the problem is an infrastructure
relationship or how the various nationality group evolved as social groups in the
infrastructure which is tied to immigration, which is tied to trade. Then there
are the various "Arab" minority workers - some who are three generations deep in
the industrial sector.

Makes me want to go drink a cold beer.

Pardon, but DMS sounds like the name of a Rap star. :-)

Melvin P.

More information about the Marxism mailing list