From: Paul Cockshott (wpc@DCS.GLA.AC.UK)
Date: Thu Apr 21 2005 - 05:30:29 EDT
Most of the sources I have read concur on the point that the Anglo Saxon form of slavery was uniquely brutal and dehumanising. Marx was clearly very strongly influenced by Cairns analysis of Southern slavery, and Cairns views thus get through indirectly to contemporary Marxism. The risk is that one then makes mistaken judgements about other periods based on this. Don't get me wrong though, I thing Cairn's work a brilliant piece of political economy. -----Original Message----- From: OPE-L [mailto:OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU] On Behalf Of Andrew Brown Sent: 20 April 2005 15:58 To: OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU Subject: Re: [OPE-L] Why aren't non-labourers sources of value? Thanks Paul, Slave architects? Certainly not what I had in mind! Don't sound much like 'talking animals' either! Andy -----Original Message----- From: OPE-L [mailto:OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU] On Behalf Of Paul Cockshott Sent: 20 April 2005 15:45 To: OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU Subject: Re: [OPE-L] Why aren't non-labourers sources of value? Andrew Brown Re. 'fluidity and creativity of labour': within slave-based society there are a fixed range of tasks to be done by 'talking animals' and animals, with land, tools etc. To the extent that slave owners get their way, fluidity or creativity of labour does not extend beyond these tasks. Paul C ------- I think this underestimates the skills of for example slave architects and tutors in classical antiquity. Also you probably overestimate the fluidity of labour in classical capitalism and underestimate it in classical antiquity. See the attached paper by Temin
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 22 2005 - 00:00:02 EDT