[Marxism] Winston Churchill refutes the Brenner thesis

Lajany Otum lajany_otum at yahoo.co.uk
Tue Dec 12 18:32:03 MST 2006

"www.leninology. blogspot.com"  wrote:

> Louis wrote:
>> 'Our [Britain's] possession of the West Indies, like that of India...
gave us the strength, the capital, the wealth at a time when no other
European  nation possessed such a reserve. It enabled us to come through the Napoleonic wars, the keen competition of the 18th and 19th centuries and enabled us to lay the foundation of that commercial and financial leadership which gave us a great position in the world.' Winston
Churchill addressing a banquet of West Indies sugar planters in London
on 20 July 1939.

> Is it a marxist approach to discuss 'capital' in the same way that
Churchill does,as if it was merely the accumulation of riches and not a
social relation?  Whydidn't Spain's vast overseas holdings allow it to
defeat the British empire and develop capitalism as early and decisively
as Britain did?

The refutation of Churchill given by www.leninology.blogspot.com is
logically flawed. Churchill statement that possession of overseas
colonies was a necessary condition for the development of British
capitalism is not the same as "the possession of colonies leads to the
development of capitalism," as www.leninology.blogspot.com seems to
imply. Thus Showing, as www.leninology.blogspot.com does, that the
possession of colonies in the case of Spain did not lead it to become
the greatest capitalist power of the time does nothing whatsoever to
dent Churchill's argument that the posession of colonies was in fact necessary for the develepment of British capitalism.

In otherwords, saying that A is a necessary condition for B is not
equivalent to saying that A is a sufficient condition for B. 

 All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of use." - PC Magazine

More information about the Marxism mailing list