Genovese

[Michael Hoover]

> I think that Genovese, even when he was a Marxist, never fully 
> understood the nature of slave owners' hegemony over non-slave-owning 
> whites -- nor did he understand what had made chattel slavery in the 
> American South different from pre-capitalist slave societies and 
> feudalism; and I argue that his inability to understand these two 
> points in part explains Genovese's post-Marxist embrace of 
> Neo-Confederacy.
> Yoshie

Bingo (I think)...

Genovese has always held antebellum US South to be feudal-like periphery
and thought southern conservatism to have markers common to European
tradition (in contrast to Russell Kirk, for example, who viewed
southern agrarianism as expression of uniquely American conservatism).

Old South legal system was inconsistent re. slave status except on
matters of punishment by death and right to sell.  Existence of several
Souths - conditions were generally more severe on large plantations, 
neighboring slavers could differ, overseers might be more/less harsh - 
does not lessen relativity of EG's "good massa."   American slavery
rested on use of force, not on planter class succeeding in manufacturing
legitimacy via other means.

Genovese maintains he's never been radical and his hostility to New and 
post-New Left/s is pretty legend.  His Marxist writings portray 
antebellum US South in manner that manifests itself in recent works as 
respect for "organic" tradition and its critical attitude toward role of 
marketplace.    Michael Hoover