Ian Murray wrote:
>
> >
> > It
> may be the case that capitalism is no more a precursor to socialism
> than theism is a precursor to atheism. It is the contingencies of
> collective action and the notorious ability of human beings to
> disagree on deep issues of social organization that makes for this
> problem, imo.
>
Apparently some problems of construal here. Jim's "a nessessary precursor to socialism" is I guess ambiguous. I read it as saying _only_ that capitalism was a necessary (but _not_, necessarily, a sufficient) cause of socialism. Capitalism does not in any sense guarantee socialism, but (a) puts it on the agenda as a possibility and as a perspective on history and (b) destroys the possibility of stagnation (stability) which was implicit in all pre-capitalist regimes. That is, in principle, most/all tributory regimes could continue more or less indefinitely, while the necessity to grow "built into" capitalism eliminates that possibility.
Carrol
(Verbal Note: "stagnation" and "stability" are essentially synonyms in their range of reference, differing only in their indication of the speaker's judgment.)