He was a man of his time. Relatively progressive for the 19th century, but the information especially about black and indigenous people in the US that he was able to get was colored by white supremacy. Because that’s the kind of stuff that could be circulated wide enough to get to Europe.
This is a fair point to raise; as I’mma keep it a buck-- I can’t say I stopped to question how Marx would’ve came into this kind of verbiage… But when you look at correspondences like these, it is still an absolutely horrendous look.
I wouldn’t say that’s that racist considering the time. It probably just refers to the specific sort of feudalism that dominated most of Asia and doesn’t have much to do with the people of asia
He was a man of his time. Relatively progressive for the 19th century, but the information especially about black and indigenous people in the US that he was able to get was colored by white supremacy. Because that’s the kind of stuff that could be circulated wide enough to get to Europe.
This is a fair point to raise; as I’mma keep it a buck-- I can’t say I stopped to question how Marx would’ve came into this kind of verbiage… But when you look at correspondences like these, it is still an absolutely horrendous look.
That would explain the “Asiatic mode of production” that sometimes gets mentioned in his works.
I wouldn’t say that’s that racist considering the time. It probably just refers to the specific sort of feudalism that dominated most of Asia and doesn’t have much to do with the people of asia
how is it different exactly? Feudalism but instead of wheat, they have rice?