It's interesting that Marx, who was such a deep thinker and astute observer when it came to capitalism and all its nuances, seemed to miss the critical role that the Iberian conquest of the Americas played in capitalism's origins. I must confess that I have read only a fraction of his voluminous writings (including their very illuminating correspondences). I'm ashamed to admit that I haven't even read Das Kapital in its entirety. Is there anywhere where Marx (or perhaps Engles) may have discussed this issue?
Thank you very much, Andrej, for your commentary. Interesting and relevant, as usual.
Marx occasionally mentions the importance of the conquest of America for the economic expansion of Europe. But his paradigm was built on the foundation of a synthesis of German philosophy, British political economy, and French socialism, analyzed from the vantage point of the Western European worker. From that perspective, Marx could work through the full implications of the conquest of America.
The insights that are possible for us today from a world-systems perspective are grounded in the Third World movements of national liberation. These revolutions emerged precisely in response to the European conquest and peripheralization of the Third World, and thus they placed colonial domination as the basis of their formulation. In Marx’s time, the Third World anti-colonial movement was in its earliest stages, and primarily in Latin America. It had not yet reached maturity, which it would attain during the second half of the twentieth century and the first quarter of the twenty-first.
Marx’s formulation was the most advanced that was possible in his time. In our time, however, the anti-imperialist and anti-neocolonial movements have reached maturity, and it is possible to reformulate our understanding on this foundation, a process that Wallerstein initiated but could not complete.
great stuff, as always Charles.
It's interesting that Marx, who was such a deep thinker and astute observer when it came to capitalism and all its nuances, seemed to miss the critical role that the Iberian conquest of the Americas played in capitalism's origins. I must confess that I have read only a fraction of his voluminous writings (including their very illuminating correspondences). I'm ashamed to admit that I haven't even read Das Kapital in its entirety. Is there anywhere where Marx (or perhaps Engles) may have discussed this issue?
Thank you very much, Andrej, for your commentary. Interesting and relevant, as usual.
Marx occasionally mentions the importance of the conquest of America for the economic expansion of Europe. But his paradigm was built on the foundation of a synthesis of German philosophy, British political economy, and French socialism, analyzed from the vantage point of the Western European worker. From that perspective, Marx could work through the full implications of the conquest of America.
The insights that are possible for us today from a world-systems perspective are grounded in the Third World movements of national liberation. These revolutions emerged precisely in response to the European conquest and peripheralization of the Third World, and thus they placed colonial domination as the basis of their formulation. In Marx’s time, the Third World anti-colonial movement was in its earliest stages, and primarily in Latin America. It had not yet reached maturity, which it would attain during the second half of the twentieth century and the first quarter of the twenty-first.
Marx’s formulation was the most advanced that was possible in his time. In our time, however, the anti-imperialist and anti-neocolonial movements have reached maturity, and it is possible to reformulate our understanding on this foundation, a process that Wallerstein initiated but could not complete.
Charles