On Sun, 26 Jul 2009, Marv Gandall wrote:
> "It is very easy to inveigh against slavery and similar things in
> general terms, and to give vent to high moral indignation at such
> infamies. Unfortunately all that this conveys is only what everyone
> knows, namely, that these institutions of antiquity are no longer in
> accord with our present conditions and our sentiments, which these
> conditions determine. But it does not tell us one word as to how these
> institutions arose, why they existed, and what role they played in
> history. AND WHEN WE EXAMINE THESE QUESTIONS, WE ARE COMPELLED TO
> SAY?HOWEVER CONTRADICTORY AND HERETICAL IT MAY SOUND?THAT THE
> INTRODUCTION OF SLAVERY UNDER THE CONDITIONS PREVAILING AT THAT TIME WAS
> A GREAT STEP FORWARD."
> http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1877/anti-duhring/ch16.htm
A delightful text. But it has nothing to do with our debate. Engels is talking about the wrongness of condemning *past eras* by our own moral code, and specifically that we should not consider the Greeks evil because they kept slaves; this is an argument against present-ism. But this has nothing to do with judging our own time by our moral code. And it has even less to do with explaining the existence of competing moral codes -- the existence of which is something of a mystery if, as Engels asserts in this passage, they correspond to modes of production, since Engels also assumes in this passage that there is only one of those per era, nevermind per society.
Michael