>But capitalism is the economic system that individualism calls into
>existence. The "rich individuality" of Marx was simply the best idea that
>he could come up with having not studied Buddhist thought in any depth.
I'm also with KM on the "progressive" and "civilizing" aspects of capital. It's given us mass literacy, complex global linkages, a world literature, and many other good things that could be the basis for an even better society. Stop me before I start quoting wholesale chunks of the Manifesto.
>Audre Lourde wrote: "you don't tear down massa's house using massa's tools."
>Marx relied on the same flawed understanding of identity that created
>capitalism in an effort to undo it.
I think that Audre Lorde aphorism is one of the most overquoted things around. Of course you can dismantle the master's house with the master's tools, if you use the right tools correctly.
What is the context for that quote, anyway? On one web page that collects some of her bromides <http://www.zami.org/lordequotes.htm>, it's rendered as "The master's tools will never dismantle the master's house," which is an empty truism, since tools don't do anything on their own. But does that mean we shouldn't use math or logic or write well? I must track down this essay and read it, but in the meanwhile, could someone provide enlightenment?
Gayatri Spivak says somewhere that white colonizers didn't want people like her to read Kant, but she did "from below." Is that a misuse of the Master's Tools?
Doug