Genovese

[JKSCHW at aol.com]

We'll have to agree to disagree about the credibility about Genovese's 
theory. Naturally G and I have read all the other material you mention, and 
it plays into the analysis of American slavery he developed and which I 
pretty much accept. You and I disgree about its meaning and plausibility. I 
will only comment on the theoretical point:

In a message dated 10/14/00 12:56:36 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
furuhashi.1 at osu.edu writes:

<< Slave owners could _do without_ the consent of slaves, because the 

 federal & other governments were on their side.  Local majorities of 

 slaves meant nothing, when the governments supported by the hegemonic 

 bloc of slave owners, capitalists, non-slave-owning whites, etc. 

 could be counted upon to enforce the laws that kept blacks enslaved 

 (& returned them to owners if they ran away). >>

But of course this destroys the very idea of a theory of hegemony, because 
the federal and state governments support the ruling class in any event and 
in all class society--that is what makes that class the ruling one. I don't 
think that it's very plausible that the slaveowners felt that the slaves had 
no interests they had to take into account, contrary to what Taney thought. 
--jks