How Big Tobacco Smoked Out the President

[Chris Burford]

At 08:41 AM 12/17/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Chris Burford:
>>This is a clash of wings of capitalism just as much as the 16th century
>>puritans, in opposing the eating of mince pies at Christmas, were actually
>>expressing an underlying class conflict.
>
>Chris, you are confusing economic determinism with Marxism. For a good
>example of economic determinism, I recommend Charles Beard's "Economic
>Interpretation of the American Constitution" which analyzes the various
>provisions on the basis of which segment of the American wealthy it would
>benefit.
>
>Marxism has a much more complex approach. Marx's 18th Brumaire explains how
>Louis Bonaparte took forceful action against the bourgeoisie in order to
>defend its long term interests. Another worthwhile explanation of the
>differences is contained in Plekhanov's "The Materialist Conception of
>History".

Well are you denying that the gist of the Observer Article I posted up is
that Ken Starr is a BAT man?

(Interesting isn't it that the "Independent Prosecutor" does not need to be
independent of BAT, but the British Law Lords have to be "independent" of
Amnesty International!)

If I am gratefully to accept my need to go through an education course on
marxism and determinism, LP will have to argue in a more interesting way,
that might illuminate this question for the list, what he actually means. I
believe myself to be deeply opposed to reductionism. Of course in
denouncing mince pies 350 years ago puritans had scores of  reasons of a
deep psychosocial nature. It is only in aggregate that the balance of
symbolisms identified the puritans as being in opposition to landed
aristocracy and aligned with the new bourgeoisie.

Clinton and Blair are for skillful management of pluralist society, with
everything factored in, and with transparency. This does not fit an old
style capitalism of nicotine addiction, with bribes, corruption, and
violation of civil rights. It does fit comfortably with more dynamic wings
of capitalism capable of managing not only the technological agenda but
civil society, with subtlety and power. 

Starr is a BAT man. The moral certainties of the Christian Coalition are
too unsubtle for progressive capitalism. The contradictions in the
Republican Party are already shifting. We will see if DeLay will be as
influential in the new Congress as he is in the dying days of the old one.

"In the last instance", it is the economic determinants that ultimately
matter. That is not determinism. 

Explain yourself, comrade Proyect!

Chris Burford

London.