I don't understand why it's not possible to think that the combination of internal changes within Europe plus imperialism combined to produce capitalism as we know it. Why is such a passionate matter of either/or dispute? Doug >>>>> Looks to me like the subtext to the essentiality of colonialism argument is that capitalism itself is not a stage of historical progress, relative to its predecessors, but merely a different form of the same underlying misery and oppression. No progress means little scope for reform, plus the irrelevance of the working class in the industrialized countries, particularly white workers in the U.S. Ergo the implied necessity of third-worldist revolution. Lin Pao (sp?) and Che are still with us. Morbid symptoms and all that. mbs
