Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Enjoy
Apr 18, 2009
In the post-industrial capitalism of the core countries, the bourgeoisie requires an educated, skilled and self-disciplining work force. These aren't compatible with slavery. In the industrial semi-periphery, it is cheaper to replace disciplining of slaves with capital goods. In the resource extracting periphery, slavery continues to exist today.

Wallerstein, Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century:
"Why different modes of organising labour - slavery, feudalism, wage labour, self-employment - at the same point in time within the world-economy? Because each mode of labour control is best suited for particular types of production. And why were these modes concentrated in different zones of the world-economy - slavery and feudalism in the periphery, wage labour and self-employment in the core, and as we shall see share-cropping in the semi-periphery? Because the modes of labour control greatly affect the political system (in particular the strength of the state apparatus) and the possibilities for an indigenous bourgeoisie to thrive. The world-economy was based precisely on the assumption that there were in fact these three zones and that they did in fact have different modes of labour control. Were this not so, it would not have been possible to assure the kind of flow of the surplus which enabled the capitalist system to come into existence."

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Enjoy
Apr 18, 2009
Forums user AVeryLargeRadish, I find it hard to believe that you are, as your name implies, a vegetable. Could you confirm for us all whether this is or is not the case?

Enjoy
Apr 18, 2009

natetimm posted:

Well first, it's not the trans-species or whatever tumblr blogs I'm referencing when I talk about Tumblr activism in the context of this thread. It's the ugly, slacktivist, echo-chamber bullshit ones that create this giant feedback loop of privilege checking alongside an endless contest of who is the most oppressed and how. It was once a running joke but more and more I see the bullshit mentality leaking into other facets of life and gaining traction and legitimacy. In all honesty I can understand why a black person would want to tell a white idiot like SedanChair describes to shut up, but I don't think trying to shame or force them into doing it, especially somewhere as volatile and anonymous as the internet, is a reasonable expectation. Do I think a feminist or black activist giving a live talk in person on issues that impact them has the right to ask those people to shut the gently caress up while they do so? Absolutely. Do I think that right extends to every idiot on the internet whose opinion happens to coincide with those activists? No. If you're going to bring your opinion into the maelstrom of terrible opinions that is the internet and shout them at people, you don't get to hide behind that barrier of protection anymore. Someone's capability of marginalizing you is already greatly reduced by the relative amount of anonymity and impersonal nature of the net itself, and that's the chance you take when you bring it to such a huge open forum.

Take your meds

  • Locked thread