> c b wrote:
>
>> The nature of necessary conditions is that there can be more than one.
>> That alienation and competition divides the working class does not
>> contradict that White supremacy divides the working class, and that
>> both are necessary conditions of the perpetuation of capitalism.
>>
>>
>
> I agree wholeheartedly that white supremacy has been an important component
> of capitalism throughout its historical development. However, it's pretty
> easy for me to imagine a world in which capitalism exists without white
> supremacy. The extraction of surplus value from labor works fine without
> racial distinctions; there are plenty of other ideological tricks to justify
> capitalism exploitation (e.g., the myth of the autonomous individual, as you
> noted). Thus I wonder if white supremacy is indeed a necessary and
> inescapable precondition for any capitalist society.
>
> Miles
Likewise: biological racism provided one mystifying and non-materialist explanation for the fact of uneven development. But most ideologists of world capitalism today see themselves, accurately, as principled opponents of biological racism. Even when the old arguments take a new form (their cultures don't assign clear enough property rights [1], rent-seeking politicians are considered socially acceptable), materialist explanations are sought out.
I think the spontaneous pro-capitalist ideology in the Third World is aspirational: capitalism equals national development equals equality with or even overtaking the current industrialized nations. This is what lies behind the skin creams, etc.
[1] Why haven't we been talking about the Ostrom Nobel?