Re: Chechen relations -- final for today - correction

[Waistline2]

In a message dated 6/27/2004 4:50:22 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In other words when the genocidal wars of extermination was launched against the Indians and after their brutal conquest there did not exist a petty bourgeoisie, a bourgeoisie or a proletariat as fundamental class - economic units amongst the various Indian nations.   Thus the various Indian people are "old nations" or advance national groups or historically evolved people who have not entered the economic development that characterizes modern nations - bourgeois property relations. Lenin is very . . . very clear about this distinction and speak repeatedly of it in his assessment of the national question. Correction   In other words when the genocidal wars of extermination was launched against the Indians and after their brutal conquest there did not exist a petty bourgeoisie, a bourgeoisie or a proletariat as fundamental class - economic units amongst the various Indian nations. Actually there were no serfs to run off into the cities under the impact of industrialization and  . . . WAS THERE EVEN A PEASANTRY . . . and did not this clan type society resemble much of "Chechnya" - which wasn't really "Chechnya" in 1850? The Indians in the main did not even have a sense and conception of property as a bourgeois relations. Owning land was like trying to own air . . . it made no social or economic sense. Yet these are historically evolved peoples several steps behind the economic phenomena called the modern nation.   None of this is stated in a derogatory sense. We are talking about an economic curve of development.   Historically evolved people are historically evolved with their unique social and cultural attributes but Lenin mean a specific thing when he says nation. Lenin is describing economics and Pen-L focus is on economics and we need to get with the program.   What is the economic logic of the so-called national movement in Chechnya in year 2004?   I'm just aksing a question.   Thus the various Indian people are "old nations" or advance national groups or historically evolved people who HAD not entered the economic development that characterizes modern nations - bourgeois property relations. There are groups of people on earth who had not got to the later stages of development of serfdom or feudalism. Lenin is very . . . very clear about this economic distinction and speak repeatedly of it in his assessment of the national question. That is why he basically said "let us be careful and more sensitive."   The Stalin period is there for all to study.  Was not the question self determination and the economic logic of the national movements and supporting self determination in 2004?     Thanks my brother for the correction.   Melvin P.