Since 1900 , the world socialist and national liberation revolutions have been the major influx changing the impact of capitalist colonialism on the Third World. The improvements Brad refers to are due to the beginning of the end of capitalism , not the rise of capitalism, as in the 17 and 1800's. The improvement in the lot of the workers of the world is due to the Russian Revolution of 1917 and following revolutions against capitalism and colonialism, not the inner tendencies of capitalism that Marx was analyzing in the passage in question. The improvements in the lots of workers and peasants in the Third World were won by their forcing the capitalist system to do what it wouldn't do in its pure operation as analyzed by Marx in _Capital_ and in the passage in question.
Even the lots workers in the First World benefitted from the Russian Revolution, Chinese Revolution, Cuban Revolution, African national liberations, because the capitalists were forced to give enormous concessions to the workers in America and Europe to prevent similar revolutions in the imperialist centers.
In Marx's terms, the quote on the worsening lot of workers is a law of a tendency. The countervailing tendencies, such as working class struggle, and revolutions must be taken into account to give a concrete, whole picture. The passage being discussed is an abstraction.
CB
>>> Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> 05/01/00 08:49PM >>>
Brad De Long wrote:
>> They
>>> don't include in the category "workers" the billions
>>> in the Third World who maybe absolutely worse off
>>> under capitalism than they were under their
>>> traditional economies.
>>
>>How? I mean, I'm willing to be proved wrong on this,
>>but It seems to me that, bad as conditions are in the
>>third world today, they are somewhat better than they
>>were before - or is subsistance agriculture, endemic
>>disease, and locally-based despotism superior to a
>>first world capitalist making a buck?
>>
>>Jim Baird
>
>Life expectancy does seem to have doubled. And fertility suggests
>vastly improved nutritional status since, say, 1900...
But there was this time in the ur-past, when work was unalienated, love was rampant, and everyone was happy all the time, even if you were lucky to hit 35.
Doug