Jim D.
Here is your use of the terminology "absolutely necessary" and "need". In this same
sense, literal slavery has been historically necessary to capitalism as was the
inclosure actions and doubly "free" ( actually free and relieved of the land as a
natural laboratory).
Charles
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/26/00 05:34PM >>>
However, Marx developed a theory of how capitalism works -- where he
defined capitalism as a commodity-producing system in which workers are not
just free from the rights accruing to the owners of the means of production
but are also free from feudal or slave bondage. Once the "doubly free"
proletariat exists (on sufficient scale, not in little pockets in the slums
of a few big cities) capitalism follows certain "laws of motion" which are
generally pretty clear. If one accepts this theory -- as I do, because it
makes sense as a theory and generally fits the facts as long as you're
clear about the level of abstraction being applied -- then the enclosure
movement or something like that is _absolutely necessary_ to capitalism's
existence and growth. If one has a different theory of capitalism -- e.g.,
that capitalism is simply a matter of markets or that capitalism is a
matter of the use of machinery and other "capital goods" -- then the need
for the "doubly free" proletariat doesn't make sense.
Of course, the fact that I see the necessity of the existence of a "doubly
free" proletariat does NOT mean that I don't see the slave trade and
similar as contributing to the development of capitalism. (They did.)
Further, it does NOT mean that I can simply assume that my theory is True
and is immune to all criticism, both empirical and logical. And again, the
counterfactual speculation only makes sense if the basic theory is accurate.
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
