[Marxism] Re: Lincoln as industrial capitalist
rrubinelli at earthlink.net
Sun May 29 00:30:39 MDT 2005
1. I can't be the only one who recalls "solid" as a term meaning
agreement, can I? Also figured you would get if from the context--
like solid with Lincoln, but not Jefferson. Should have figured again,
context is like... history, and you don't seem to grasp that either.
2. Comparing LBJ to Lincoln, or the USMS actions in the 1960s to Lincoln
and the Union Army in the 1860s is absurd. Difference is in....history.
1860-- bourgeois class ascending where to achieve its own power, its own
"emancipation," it must speak to the emancipation of all (Marx).
1960s-- different class ascending, bourgeoisie attempting to contain it.
How many US marshals died in "combat" defending civil rights actions?
How many died protecting James Meredith when he integrated ole Miss, not
to mention died defending him from being shot in the back? More
importantly, and historically, how did actions of US marshals
fundamentally change property relations? Simple questions.
That marshals protected African-Americans is fine. Doesn't change the
historical context, the purpose of the actions of the ruling class.
3. Besides that, what the Union Army did was unfinished, incomplete,
even within that historical context, requiring Reconstruction, radical
Reconstruction, Black Reconstruction, and weren't you telling me 3 or 4
months ago how the Reconstruction governments were "carpetbaggers" and
oppressive to black and white alike? See above comment on history.
4. No, I did not require US marshals to assure my ability to attend
school, but I was involved in actions that US marshals, and other
police/military forces "protected." So do me the favor and show me the
links between their actions and the Emancipation Proclamation. There
is a link, believe me, but it isn't what you think it is. That link is
the pivotal role of black labor in US history. Oops, there it is
5. Somewhere along the line you've got to get your facts straighter--
Toyota doesn't dominate the US market, China did not radically increase
its consumption of oil 98-99, Reconstruction governments were not
oppressive to black and white alike, and LBJ did what he did, in DC, in
Mississippi, and in Vietnam to maintain capital against the prospects
for real social emancipation.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carlos A. Rivera" <cerejota at optonline.net>
To: "Activists and scholars in Marxist tradition"
<marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu>
Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2005 7:25 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Re: Lincoln as industrial capitalist
> Quite frankly, I didn't understand part of this posts. In particular
> "solid" thing, to what do you refer? Solid? WTF?
More information about the Marxism