Weird. All of a sudden I get a dozen or so pen-l posts
from JUNE! Michael Pugliese
>From: Yoshie Furuhashi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Date: 6/17/01 1:27:24 AM
>
>Lou says:
>
>>As Colin Leys correctly noted in his silly 1978 Socialist Register
article
>>on the "bourgeois re
Justin:
>postwar era were both workers and in a sense unfree labor. But unfree labor,
>people constrained by direct coercion to work, has been with capitalism all
>along.
With capitalism? I am not sure what this means. For example, there were
peasant communes in Russia that co-existed "with cap
Louis asks good hard questions here, but I think that the South African case
mainly shows that ideal types are idealizations that don't always fit real
world circumstances perfectly. Surely, Black South African workers in the
postwar era were both workers and in a sense unfree labor. But unfree
Chris Burford:
>I checked the web for the South African Communist Party before posting. I
>do not recall their exact formulation and Proyect or others may be able to
>supply a fuller explanation. What I recalled however is relevant to the
>debate: that they needed a formula that took into accou
try to avoid characterizing other.
On Tue, Jun 19, 2001 at 12:57:13AM +0100, Chris Burford wrote:
> At 17/06/01 11:51 -0400, Louis Proyect wrote:
> >Bufrod:
> > >In order to build a successful united front it is important to understand
> > >the different positions of different sections of the wor
Bufrod:
>In order to build a successful united front it is important to understand
>the different positions of different sections of the working people.
I advocate united fronts between working class organizations, not popular
fronts between working class parties and bourgeois parties run by Ton
>What was the cause of the white capitalist class?
>
>Yoshie
Their mommies and daddies had sex?
Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org/
