{"title":"早期伊比利亚奴隶贸易中的死亡经济学、原始积累和种族资本主义","authors":"Anna More","doi":"10.1353/jem.2019.0020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:This article argues that necroeconomics, the theory and practice of letting populations die in the interest of preserving a free market, first appeared in writings on the early Iberian slave trade. Gil Eanes de Zurara's Chronicle of the Discovery and Conquest of Guinea (1453) describes the first large-scale sale of enslaved Africans in 1444, representing it as a breach in natural law. The Portuguese historian justifies this breach through the presence of the sovereign and by suggesting racial distinctions between the Africans and the Portuguese. By the end of the sixteenth century, these justifications were further developed in Scholastic economic theory. Luis de Molina's De Iustitia et Iure (1593) argues that even if they lacked documentation, traders could assume that any African sold had been legitimately enslaved, effectively freeing the market from natural law and sovereign control. While necroeconomics has been linked to eighteenth-century liberalism, these examples indicate that its theory and practice were already present in the context of what Karl Marx termed \"originary accumulation.\" Recognizing this early necroeconomics deepens understandings of what has been called \"racial capitalism,\" here defined as the inextricability of capitalist accumulation from the racialized distribution of life and death.","PeriodicalId":42614,"journal":{"name":"Journal for Early Modern Cultural Studies","volume":"19 1","pages":"100 - 75"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/jem.2019.0020","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Necroeconomics, Originary Accumulation, and Racial Capitalism in the Early Iberian Slave Trade\",\"authors\":\"Anna More\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/jem.2019.0020\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:This article argues that necroeconomics, the theory and practice of letting populations die in the interest of preserving a free market, first appeared in writings on the early Iberian slave trade. Gil Eanes de Zurara's Chronicle of the Discovery and Conquest of Guinea (1453) describes the first large-scale sale of enslaved Africans in 1444, representing it as a breach in natural law. The Portuguese historian justifies this breach through the presence of the sovereign and by suggesting racial distinctions between the Africans and the Portuguese. By the end of the sixteenth century, these justifications were further developed in Scholastic economic theory. Luis de Molina's De Iustitia et Iure (1593) argues that even if they lacked documentation, traders could assume that any African sold had been legitimately enslaved, effectively freeing the market from natural law and sovereign control. While necroeconomics has been linked to eighteenth-century liberalism, these examples indicate that its theory and practice were already present in the context of what Karl Marx termed \\\"originary accumulation.\\\" Recognizing this early necroeconomics deepens understandings of what has been called \\\"racial capitalism,\\\" here defined as the inextricability of capitalist accumulation from the racialized distribution of life and death.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42614,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal for Early Modern Cultural Studies\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"100 - 75\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-03-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/jem.2019.0020\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal for Early Modern Cultural Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/jem.2019.0020\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CULTURAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for Early Modern Cultural Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jem.2019.0020","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CULTURAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5
摘要
摘要:本文认为,死亡经济学,即为了维护自由市场而让人口死亡的理论和实践,最早出现在关于早期伊比利亚奴隶贸易的著作中。吉尔·伊内斯·德·祖拉拉的《发现和征服几内亚编年史》(1453)描述了1444年非洲奴隶的第一次大规模买卖,认为这是违反自然法则的行为。葡萄牙历史学家通过君主的存在和非洲人和葡萄牙人之间的种族区别来证明这种违背是合理的。到16世纪末,这些理由在经院经济理论中得到进一步发展。路易斯·德·莫利纳(Luis de Molina)在1593年出版的《论奴隶与自由》(de Iustitia et Iure)一书中认为,即使缺乏相关文件,商人也可以假设,任何被出售的非洲人都是合法的奴隶,从而有效地将市场从自然法和主权控制中解放出来。虽然死亡经济学与18世纪的自由主义联系在一起,但这些例子表明,它的理论和实践已经出现在卡尔·马克思所谓的“原始积累”的背景下。认识到这种早期的死亡经济学加深了对所谓“种族资本主义”的理解,这里将其定义为资本主义积累与种族化的生死分配密不可分。
Necroeconomics, Originary Accumulation, and Racial Capitalism in the Early Iberian Slave Trade
Abstract:This article argues that necroeconomics, the theory and practice of letting populations die in the interest of preserving a free market, first appeared in writings on the early Iberian slave trade. Gil Eanes de Zurara's Chronicle of the Discovery and Conquest of Guinea (1453) describes the first large-scale sale of enslaved Africans in 1444, representing it as a breach in natural law. The Portuguese historian justifies this breach through the presence of the sovereign and by suggesting racial distinctions between the Africans and the Portuguese. By the end of the sixteenth century, these justifications were further developed in Scholastic economic theory. Luis de Molina's De Iustitia et Iure (1593) argues that even if they lacked documentation, traders could assume that any African sold had been legitimately enslaved, effectively freeing the market from natural law and sovereign control. While necroeconomics has been linked to eighteenth-century liberalism, these examples indicate that its theory and practice were already present in the context of what Karl Marx termed "originary accumulation." Recognizing this early necroeconomics deepens understandings of what has been called "racial capitalism," here defined as the inextricability of capitalist accumulation from the racialized distribution of life and death.