From: Santiago.Colas-AT-um.cc.umich.edu
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 95 23:18:26 EST


I'm a little reluctant to get in the middle of this, especially since
Ralhph seems to have appreciated my raising of CLR James in the midst
of the dialectics exchanges (or have I confused to two different
individuals--if so sorry).
At any rate, I'm not sure that being a "Marxist" means the primacy
of the conomic base.  Isn't being a Marxist about the prmacy of
material relations of production and it so happens -- and this
is Marx in the Grundrisse, if I'm reading correctly -- that when
Marx was writing the analyss and policitical strategy had to enter, if
you will, by way of the eocnomic.  But shouldn't that particular
entry point be historical like everything else in Marx's theory?  Isn't
that historicity of the very categories ofMarxism the other central
element of what being a Marxist means? 
Santiago Colas


     --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

     ------------------