Re Fred's [OPE-L:1534]:
======================
Maybe there is some room for a (non-so-surprising) agreement.
*If* we can agree that the subject matter of _Capital_ is capitalism
(which, I think, Mike, Gil, Fred, I, and some others have agreed to);
*and*,
*If* we can say that it is appropriate to ask not only what topics a
particular level of analysis answers but *also* what questions are *not*
answered at that level of analysis,
*then*,
couldn't we say that while the relation of capitalism to issues
associated with non-capitalist modes of production aren't analyzed in any
systematic way in _Capital_ they nonetheless *need* to be investigated at a
more concrete level of determination?
What would such a level of analysis be? Would it begin by examining
landed property or foreign trade or the world market and crises or what
the Uno-school calls stage theory?
To the extent that capitalism, while being the dominant economic system,
is not the *only* mode of production in existence, i.e. there are still
remnants of pre-capitalist social formations in many parts of the world
today, this would seem to be an important question.
Do others agree with what I take -- perhaps optimistically -- to be a
not-so-surprising agreement?
In OPE-L Solidarity,
Jerry