From: Paul Zarembka (zarembka@BUFFALO.EDU)
Date: Fri Apr 23 2004 - 10:38:31 EDT
Juriaan, I believe you misunderstand me (in a similar manner as Howard did initally, but I believe he now understands). I am making a theoretical point. I 'merely' say that modern dispossesion processes (which you label 'primitive' or 'original accumulation of capital') are part of 'accumulation of capital' proper. Could I recommend that either you go back to my interchange with Howard or read my side of the debate in *The Commoner*. If you think *The Commoner* overall is accomplishing something worthwhile, then you and I are on the same page. If not, then it is I who misunderstand you. Paul Z. --On Friday, April 23, 2004 9:50 AM -0400 OPE-L Administrator <ope-admin@RICARDO.ECN.WFU.EDU> wrote: > Paul Zarembka writes in reply to my statement that original accumulation > occurs continuously in the history of capitalist development that: > > "I disagree. Original or primitive accumulation should be a concept > reserved for the transition from feudalism to the initial establishment > of capitalism." > > With due respect, I think this is either a scholasticist, subjective > interpretation of the topic, or a bit of poetry. If we approach the > topic with scientific objectivity and thorough legal scrutiny, we must > admit that processes of dispossession and expropriation (and their > corollary, proletarianisation) occur continuously in the capitalist > system.... > > To you in your academic position, all this this might be a bit of > poetry, but to many people, including myself, it's been not a joke, but > a miserable reality,...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Apr 24 2004 - 00:00:02 EDT