Yes, I have Reed's books on these issues. The International edition of _The Origin of the Family_ has an updating intro by anthropologist Eleanor Leacock.
The Manifesto of the Communist Party has one modification of its famous first line, done by Engels later in life. There is a footnote modifying the proposition "History is a history of class struggles" such that "history" as class struggle begins at the breaking up of the primitive commune. In this Engels makes the same correction of _The German Ideology_ statement about production being the origin of humanly distinct society that I did at the beginning of this thread. Again , I'd say the critical difference between human labor and animals' "labor" is that humans have ideas. This allows the labor to be more social than animals' labor, both in social connections with living members of the species, for example in hunting parties, or with dead members of the species , as in ancestor "worship". Charles Steve Gabosch bebop101 at comcast.net This particular discussion has moved in a different direction from investigating dialectics per se, and could be considered in part to be about the labor theory of the origins of humanity. In a way, we having been using the terms "production" and "labor" synonymously in our recent dialogues. But the concept of labor - and how it is different from animal activity - is in my opinion the key that unlocks the puzzle of how humanity originated and what it means to be human. I think Charles is entirely correct in going back to Marx, especially his most advanced work, _Capital_, to look for a dialectical materialist analysis of labor. I also basically agree with his insistence that it is the *social* dimension of labor that differentiates what humans do from all other species. However, since most animals are also "social," a deeper inquiry is needed. More very good discussion of these issues can be found in George Novack's essay "The Labor Theory of the Origins of Humanity," contained in his collection _Humanism and Socialism_ (1973). Novack is what I would call a Marxist continuist, meaning, he consciously continues in the tradition of Marx and Engels, and advocates a continuation of the fundamental concepts of Marxist doctrine. He returns to this labor theory theme many times in his writings, such as in his "Long View of History" contained in his collection _Understanding History_ (1972). Another Marxist continuist relevant to this issue of the origins of humanity is Evelyn Reed, who wrote numerous essays and books on Marxist anthropology in the '50's, '60's and '70's that also relied heavily on Marx and Engels. Her collection _Sexism and Science_ (1978) includes several of these essays. She also wrote a good introduction to _The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State_ by Engels in a 1972 Pathfinder Press edition. This edition also contains the Engels essay "The Part Played By Labor in the Transition from Ape to Human," written in 1876 but not published until 1896, a year after his death. All of these books are in print and available from Pathfinder Press. BTW, for those unfamiliar with these writers, both were leaders of the US Socialist Workers Party and were longtime partners until Reed's death in 1979. I encourage Charles to incorporate these writings in his studies about the origins of humanity. - Steve _______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
