[ show plain text ]
I think all these questions were already resolved in Marx's life time. Why
are they raised again from the burial?
They have *not* been solved, and they are *not* buried. Marx never analyses
slavery to any great extent, as has been shown in our brief debate. Even
categories that he did analyse extensively - eg, money - have been the
subject of extensive debate as we know only too well.
This debate is important for two reasons; first, as has been shown by many on
this list, slavery was economically important and it was closely linked to
advanced capitalism (within nations and across the world economy) until
relatively recently. Second, this debate closely mirrors previous exchanges
(in the early 70s) about the persistence of (semi-) feudalism in Latin
America and elsewhere until mid-C20th, or even until now.
Even if one granted Chai-on the claim that Marx *thought* that he had solved
problems such as these in his lifetime, this is no reason to bury these
issues because they continue to have historical and empirical relevance, and
have immediate economic and political implications.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Apr 21 2000 - 09:47:58 EDT