Total agreement. Paul Zarembka wrote: > Michael, I'm not sure you are incorrect as I think the problem hinges on > the correct Marx text. With the "and" it looks like peasants are included, > without the "and" it looks like large capitalists are gobbling up the small > ones who are involved in production in their own enterprises. Without the > "and" the whole passage doesn't seem very significant and this is perhaps > what you are now picking up in saying the citation is not terribly > important. > > For those interested, *The Commoner*, at www.commoner.org.uk as an online > publication, has a whole issue on Enclosures, including a reprint of some > of Michael's book. > > Paul > > ************************************************************************ > Paul Zarembka, editor, RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY at > ********************* http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka > > Michael Perelman <michael@ECST.CSUCHICO.EDU> said, on 01/09/02: > > >Paul, thanks for pointing out the error in my citation. I am not sure > >that I would say that I considered it terribily important, just a shred of > >evidence -- an perhaps one based on an incorrect translation. > > >Paul Zarembka wrote: > > >> > >> Perelman's *The Invention of Capitalism*, p. 31, bottom, considers the > >> passage important (he cites p. 348, not 349, 1981 Vintage) for indicating > >> the on-going character of 'primitive accumulation' (I don't agree, but is > >> another matter, after we get past to the correct text). > >> > > >-- > > >Michael Perelman > >Economics Department > >California State University > >Chico, CA 95929 > > >Tel. 530-898-5321 > >E-Mail michael@ecst.csuchico.edu -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael@ecst.csuchico.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Feb 02 2002 - 00:00:05 EST