No doubt tribes quarreled over scarce resource, but lets recall that scarcity under capitalism is largely manufactured as a matter or policy.
Joanna
----- Original Message ----- Ah, just noticed. Seems the referenced quote was mine, last year.
On Dec 17, 2015, at 12:01 PM, Carrol Cox <cbcox at ilstu.edu> wrote:
> I pick up a thread from November 23-24, 2010, with the subject line, RIP
> Chalmers Johnson
>
> For all but the first post the subject line should have been "Capitalism an
> Aberration?" And underlying that topic was the question of whether Progress
> was inherent in human history. I do not think either of those questions were
> adequately explored, and perhaps my new subject line will help to a sharper
> focus.
>
> Below is the last post in the thread. My current comment will follow.
>
> ******
> Marv Gandall Wednesday, November 24, 2010 2:05 PM
>
> On 2010-11-24, at 2:16 PM, Eubulides wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 9:37 AM, Wojtek S wrote:
>
> The norm for humankind was the opposite - social solidarity and reciprocity
> - because it was essential for survival.
>
> =================
>
> What was so great about the forms of social solidarity and obligation in
> 13th century Europe or Yuan and Ming era China that they should be
> considered the norm on which to assert capitalism is an historical
> aberration?
>
> [MG] Wojtek and Carrol are idealizing the relations which existed between
> masters and slaves, lords and serfs, in order to make their dubious point
> that the relationship between capitalists (deemed to lack any sense of
> paternalistic obligation) and workers is incomparably worse. The classless
> hunter-gatherer societies which preceded these modes of production may have
> uniquely exhibited social solidarity within the narrow confines of the clan
> or tribe, but fighting between clans and tribes over scarce resources was as
> common as later conflicts between capitalist nation-states.
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk