Historical Materialism and Racism/Sexism/Heterosexism

Lisa & Ian Murray seamus at accessone.com
Tue Mar 13 19:44:46 PST 2001


Last things first. At least you admit you don't have a theory. I think you

are confused about Occam's razor. More economic theoretical resources are

better, but no theory is not better than some theory. What you want is an

economical theory.

Functionalism is your term, not mine. I think functional explanations are

legitimate, and historical materialist explanations are broadly

functionalist. That is why I think it right to sat that, e,g,, racism is

explained in part because it swerves ruling class interests, i.e., is

functional for them. I don't say everything is functional for something;

sometimes there are dysfunctional social phenomena that threaten a mode of

production. That is how change happens, or one way it does. I talk about

this stuff in my paper Functional Explanation and Metaphysical Individualism

(on Cohen and Elster), Philosophy of Science 1993.

*********

A great essay if I do say so meself. As for racism serving this function I'll submit that Justin take a look at Bell vs. Maryland [378 US Reports -1963] and Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States [1964] where the court wrote of "the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Agency who wrote that it was his 'belief that air commerce is adversely impacted by the denial to a substantial segment of the traveling public of adequate and desegregated public accomodations.'" While ,yes it is anecdotal, it does send a strong signal that ending racism was in the economic interests of many capitalists [gotta increase aggregate demand]. This sets up one of the pitfalls for functionalist explanations; their hypersensitivity to context.

Although I think that Cohenite forces-of-priduction HM is a valid and

extextaully based account of Marx, I am a class struggle HM-ist. I put class

relations as primary before forces of production. Briefly, in my account,

class relations provide a structure taht selects functionally useful

institutions and practices (liked racism_. These are learned, and inherited,

hence Lamarkian (acqwuired characteristics are inherited). Internal

instabilities (dysfunctionalities) may arise when the class relations cannot

reproduce themselves without producing system-underming patterns. The best

account we have of this is Brenner's story about the rise of capitalism in

England, heavily debated here some time ago. I think this qualifies as a

historical amterailsim in the Marxian tradition. *********

Um, in the [very] long run they may possibly be generative of Baldwin effects, but the use of the Lamarkian approach is a misnomer-why not just say cumulatively path dependent.

I think the proof of the pudding is in the eating. There is no plausible

rival that has been remotely as fruitful a historical reserach program as

historical materialism. EP Thompson (the writer who taught me to think about

history), Hobsbawm, Genovese, back when he was good, Christopher Hill, Marc

Bloch, GEM de Stee Crois, MI Finley, Roidney Hilton, Brenner himself--the

great HM--were (are) good because of their HM. Of course they were nor

orthodox. Neither, in case you had not noticed, am I. It;s sort of pathetic

to see you atry to pry them away from the deep theoritrical commitment taht

anim,ates their work, and suggest that their graet work does not vindicate

the principles that inform it.

********

Given the typos, somebody has had too much caffeine...

Neither. I don't go in for Parsons or the French stuff, though I like

Foucault for some things.

*****

Both of you would get a kick out of Niklas Luhmann....

Ian



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list