Re: Which Marxism? (fwd)

>> i agree. SCP was a phase in the development of capitalism, and marx
>> predicted that it would "diminish", as it happened historically in
>> western europe. SCP is an intermediary stage essential to capitalist
>> development. Maurice Dobb suggests that, in this phase, the _relations
of
>> production_ may change whereas the _productive forces_ may retain their
>> medieval charecter. however, this is a mode of production that is
"already
>> in a process of transformation into a capitalist one". This is a quote
>> from IW's book (second volume)

>SCP isn't an intermediary phase, and since 1550 it was capitalist in
>nature,
>from IWs view. 


first, i think that you are reading W incorrectly here. he is definetly
aware of the intermediary stage of the kind i am talking about. plus,
intermediary stage does NOT mean that SCP is non-capialist, it carries the
_potential_ and internal dynamics to become so (unlike feudalism). so, i
recommend you to read the above comment objectively.

you know what elson? your logic sounds like the new leftist critics of
marx who once argued that _socialism is nothing but another form of
capitalism_. they bacame anti-marxist in the end.if you refuse to 
see any qualitative changes among modes of productios, reifying them as
capitalist, then i wonder what constitues non-capitalist in your
terminology. or can you envision it?

Mine Aysen Doyran