Affiliation:
1. School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London
Abstract
Abstract
This reply defends the need for a specifically materialist historiography of modes of production other than capitalism; argues that Marxists should see history as being driven by the state as much as it is by classes; defends the scientific value of the category ‘merchant capitalism’; and explains why Marx came around to seeing the slave plantations as part of ‘total capital’. It concludes by suggesting both that Marx allowed for different levels of determination when thinking about the origins of capitalism, and that Brenner’s account of the transition in English agriculture has now been seriously weakened by Jane Whittle’s critique of it.
Subject
General Economics, Econometrics and Finance,History,Sociology and Political Science,Political Science and International Relations,Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
Reference63 articles.
1. ‘Reconstructing Historical Materialism’;Banaji,2014
2. ‘Mickwitz’s Modernism: The Writings of 1932–1936’;Banaji,2007a
Cited by
11 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献