Re: Which Marxism? (fwd)

> You seem to believe that because the world did not become a mirror image
> of 19th century England or lose small commodity production entirely that
> Marx has been proven wrong. These points are what are strawdogs.
>
> You drag in Bill Warren in to the discussion and suggest that his analysis
> is exemplary of Marxist orthodoxy. As Petras has noted, not Marx, Lenin,
> Luxemburg, or Bukharin would lend their weight to Warren's claims.

But let me add as a final comment from me, that I do think KM's views in his
final
years changed from one in which he saw colonialism as progressive to one in
which he saw it as mostly destructive.  Also, he did suggest the creation of
an unequal international division of labor and unequal exchange.  Had he
lived another 10-20 years, who knows?

There is enough in Marx to suggest that he was moving towards a
world-system-like perspective.  But this does not undo the debate between
those who emphasize "imperialism" (e.g. from Lenin on), and those who note
the key role of unequal exchange (Emmanuel, IW, etc.) and emphasize the DOL
as also a market based phenomenon.

Personally, I think the critics of WS and dependency wrongly suggest that
IW, Frank, et al, ignore imperialism and the class relations of the
periphery.