This is a long, well-researched article that takes on John Kerry's environmentalist platform but goes much deeper into broader questions of oil depletion, global warming, etc. It cites Mark Jones extensively as well as Henry Liu. Highly recommended.

Comment

Any blow against Kerry and Company as the solution to the Bush Jr. administration has my unqualified support . . . period. I write very little on the Kerry controversy and what is called the "3rd Party Movement" . . . because I personally will write in Lenin's name on the ballot . . . if I decide to vote.

The majority of Americans do not vote and because someone says that they should or how they should vote . . . does not move me in interesting places. Then . . . I might decide to vote for Nader. I voted for Gus Hall before and did not agree with his Marxism.

Brother Goff begins his article with the following:

"Imperialism is the political _expression_ of the accumulation of capital in its competitive struggle for what remains still open of the non-capitalist environment"

-Rosa Luxemburg, "The accumulation of capital," 1913

In my opinion this is not true and was never true as a theoretical proposition and most certainly was not true in 1913 and . . . the truth was verified in the outbreak of the First Imperial World War . . . which was over a re division of a world divided into sphere of influence and domination.

Re division of the world is an important concept . . . as a theory concept . . . because all the world was already being drawn forward in the orbit of capitalist imperialism . . . before 1913.

The domination of the world market and its economic structure . . . based primarily on the closes colonial system . . . as opposed to what Lenin tagged financial industrial imperialism . . . meant that capitalist imperialism had already fundamental triumphed as a colonizing force.

An attribute of Lenini's imperialism is the distinction between the export of financial capital as a social power versus the export of raw materials and human capital . . . sorry . . . Organizations of human beings on behalf of the capitalist imperialist. Michael Hudson in his Super Imperialism unravels this export of finance and updates this process in his preface to the 2002 edition. (I have both . . . the original and the update).

That is to say the issue was not capitalist imperialism filling in all the non-capitalist space with capitalism . . . a horrible abstraction . . . because at each distinct juncture in the development of the industrial system . . . its colonial adjuncts provide a material function to the imperial centers.

We are not talking about a world of 1910 -1913 dominated by fedual imperialism.

OK . . . the question is the meaning of "what remains still open of the non-capitalist environment."

Then . . . yep . . . then . . . "capital in its competitive struggle" is through in to mean something . . . but imperialism by definition is the export of a more developed means of production . . . as the curve of history . . . to a backwards people . . . or what is politically correct to say today . . . a less economically developed people.

What was exported if not bourgeois relations? Filling in the non capitalist environment means filing in the "space" as in putting together a puzzle.

Let me guess . . . I miss the dialectic.

This is a crappie argument that was solved almost 90 years ago by Lenin and others.

I am not arguing the energy question because running out of oil might be the best thing to happen to humanity . .. in the short and long run. I am not arguing entropy . . . but ask the reading to delve into who obesity can be the primary cause of premature death in America today?

I have had enough of this for now and disagree with the description of the evolution of the industrial revolution . . . on the basis of quotes for the late Mark Jones. The industrial revolution or what became heavy industry as the pivot evolved from manufacture of heavy manufacture as opposed to the manufacture of consumer goods . . . and this is old hat.

As if saying somthing a thousand times makes it right.

Well . . . until one unravels the evolution of what is called "needs" and how "need" are restructure and created on the basis of distinct modes of production the energy question remains un resolvable.

And reduces communist to asking people not to eat a tuna fish sandwich . . . something I will not do. Why did industrial capitalism develop on a curve of history where the automobile achieve prime important? Here is the energy question in the flesh and the way to take it too our working class.

To each his own.

And it is good to argue in the same circle.

Melvin P.

Re: Stan Goff article

Reply via email to