Stampeding bison?

Jim heartfield jim at heartfield.demon.co.uk
Mon Dec 21 10:42:27 PST 1998


In message <CMM.0.90.0.914250235.kbevans at panix3.panix.com>, K. Bevans <kbevans at panix.com> writes
> It's strange to me that you vociferously reject a "stagist"
>concept of Marxism and then decry every society that's developed past
>primitive communism. It's clear to me that the appealing nature of native
>American culture comes from it's primitive communist character. Without
>metal tools and organized agriculture, what did these people have except
>nature and each other? Their economy defined their culture as much or
>more than most cultures. When the development of native American culture
>was arrested by European invasion, they had a stone age economy. They
>used stone tools. That means their capital resources were freely
>available to anyone willing to search for them. How do you apply a
>culture formed under those economic conditions to our modern one?

Louis Proyect objects to this comment from Boddhisatva in another mail, but everything B. says can be supported by these selections from the great Latin American Marxist Mariategui, proponent of indigenism:

'Above all, capitalist civilisation has internationalised the life of humanity and created material links among all peoples which establish an inevitable solidarity among them. Internationalism is not merely an ideal; it is a historical reality. Progress unifies and combines the interests, ideas, customs and regimes of peoples.' (p4)

'These people are surprised that the most advanced ideas reach Peru, but are not surprised at the arrival of the airplane, the ocean liner, the wireless telegraph, and the radio - all the most advanced expressions of Europe's material progress.' (p4)

'indigenismo is neither a literary speculation nor a romantic pastime. Nor is it an indigenismo that, like many others, reduces itself to an innocuous apologia for the Incan empire and its splendors. In place of a Platonic love for the Incan past, the revolutionary indigenistas show an active concrete soildarity with today's Indian.

This indigenismo does not indulge in fantasies of utopian restorations.' (p71)

'Western civilisation is neither as rotten or exhausted as Valcarel supposes. Nor once it has acquired its experience and technique, and ideas can Peru mystically renounce such valid and precious instruments and return with bitter intransigence to its old agrarian myths.' (p84)

'Socialism presupposes a capitalist technique, science, and stage, and cannot signify the least regression in the acquisition of the conquests of modern civilisation.' (p92)

'The Indian was not conquered by an ethnically or qualitatively superior race, but was conquered by its technology, which was far above the technology of the aboriginal peoples.' (p99)

'The Indian is in no way inferior to the mestizo in his abilities to assimilate progressive techniques of modern production.' (p98)

'Spanish feudalism superimposed itself over indigenous agrarianism respecting its communitarian forms. But this very adaptation created a static order, an economic system whose factors of stagnation were the best guarantee of indigenous servitude. Capitalist industry breaks this equilibrium, interrupts this stagnation,c reating new productive forces and new relations of production.' (p100)

'The greatest accusation against the republic's ruling class is that it has been able to formulate but not speed the process of the colonial economy into a capitalist economy.' (100)

All quotes from The Heroic and Creative Meaning of Socialism, Jose Carlos Mariategui, Humanities Press, NJ, 1996

-- Jim heartfield



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list