To get at the distinction between wage-labor and slave labor, and what it means for both the laborer and the plantation owner, and to see what happens regarding technology and social relations, I can think of no better work than John C. Rodrigue ]Reconstruction in the Cane Fields[.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Louis Proyect" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <PEN-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU> Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2007 5:42 PM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] What Marx meant by primitive accumulation > Jim Devine wrote: > > > it's a mistake to generalize from one plantation to conclude anything > > about the Southern slave-plantation cotton & sugar complex. Jefferson > > introduced improvements because he was in love with the > > Englightenment. > > An idealistic intepretation from the get go. > > > But most plantation-owners accumulated land and slaves > > rather than improving technology (which they thought wouldn't mix with > > slavery) and rejected the Enlightenment, clinging instead to > > paternalistic & nostalgic visions equating themselves to the Greek > > and/or Roman slave-owners. (for some reason, Eugene Genovese fell in > > love with these ideologies.) > > > What kind of technology could you possibly be talking about in the 1770s > and 1780s? Computers? Diesel tractors? Fuel-injected frammuses? >
