Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 11:35:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Seay <entheogens-AT-yahoo.com> Subject: Re: AUT: American Civil War Info, you state that during the American Civil War: << to the extent > that they remained under > the control of the bourgeoisie it did become just a > case of bourgeoisie > versus bourgeoisie.>> Yes, of course it was the bourgeoisie vs. bourgeoisie. I would not argue against that. My point was that the resolution of the war brought about the triumph of industrial capitalism (that the North represented)...this liberated the means of production from the fetters of an antiquated regressive mode of production (that of the slave plantation system). This was OBJECTIVELY progressive (no matter the particularities of the various individual players). It occurs to me that you believe that there are only two systems that could ever exist (1) socialism and (2) everything else. If something isn't socialist it must not be progressive, no matter what the historical context it appears in. This way of thinking does not take into account the historical development of the productive forces (leading up to socialism) but looks at it from some sort of purely moral perspective (there are the bad guys, the ruling class, and the good guys ...the laborers) It makes no distinction between classes and the various social strata in history. According to this point of view, we could have had a socialist revolution in the middle ages, if some "good" person would have just thought of it. Thomas Seay __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005