[A-List] New Economy Bull

[Annewilliamson]

Since you are concerned about "the conquest and plunder" of the NA
indigineous population by colonizing Europeans, don't you then consider NA
to have been the property of the indigineous peoples?  What's ahistorical
about that?
----- Original Message -----
From: "bon moun" <sherrynstan at igc.org>
To: <a-list at lists.econ.utah.edu>
Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 8:06 AM
Subject: Re: [A-List] New Economy Bull


> Property can NOT exist but for the state.  It is a completely
> politico-historical phenomenon.
>
> I am more than a little taken aback by the reference to the American
> Revolution as some deeply liberatory experience.  The entire project of
> exploiting the Americas was one of conquest and plunder.  Which
meritocracy
> do people refer to when they talk like this?  The chattel slave economy of
> the South built on the plunder of indigenous people?  Or the development
of
> Northern machinofacture - also on former indigenous land - that wase based
> absolutely on Southern cotton?  The emancipation of the American
Revolution
> was of a strengthening local bourgeoisie from a decaying and distant
> European aristocracy.
>
> One fundamental weakness of libertarianism (I was one once, long, long ago
> in a place far, far away...) is its absolute ahistoricism.  It's a
> mythology, based on a kind of formulaic logic, premised on the "liberty"
of
> an atomized individual with no ancestors.
>
> 2,000,000+
> Is the US criminal justice system a weapon of mass destruction?
>
> Money for reparations, not for war!
>
>
>