And then in a discussion that we had in Binghamton,
Aníbal Quijano,
Grosfoguel and Walter Mignolo were there,
I told Wallerstein:
-No!, Modernity does not start in the enlightenment,
it starts with the invasion of America in 1492,
Modernity starts with the opening to the Atlantic,
The 16th Century
is always discarded as unimportant in social science,
I recall having read a book by Leopoldo Zea
which says that
we as latin americans are out of history
because Spain was erased by the enlightenment ,
in the 18th Century
in the 18th Century the enlightenment said:
The North of Europe is Europe,
the South was...
and when I say enlightenment, think about Kant,
Voltaire, Montesquieu,
Rousseau,
but about Marx too
so, if we don't destroy this view,
we disappear from history
First Modernity
is a “Mercantile Monetary Capitalism”
is a time of accumulation of wealth,
but this wealth is already Capitalist not feudal
20,000 tons of silver flow to Europe in the 16th Century
a gigantic accumulation of Money!,
but money that already starts to become Capital,
because there is Subsumed Work
Sergio Bagú, professor here, exiled too,
shows that the middle ages ended in 1492
and everything that happened in Latin America
was modern, and capitalist, not feudal
the 'haciendas', the 'mita'
indians in 'encomienda'
these were not medieval institutions
these never existed in middle ages,
in addition there was a World Currency,
-Ah!, and if it was “Global”,
How come we talk about Fiefs?,
And where this World Currency came from?
from Zacatecas and Potosí
we produced the World Currency,
we didn't have middle ages here
this had nothing to do with feudalism,
this was the Mercantile stage
the first stage of Modernity,
but still not Industrial,
then it was necessary
to ask Marx what does that means
is well studied,
with great accuracy,
how the native american and the african slave,
produced a surplus
that became Surplus Value in Europe,
and is accumulated as Capital
i.e., the 16th Century is a first stage of Capitalism
More!,
is the stage of great Monetary Accumulation
through a new institution
never thought before,
Colonialism
Adam Smith in ‘The Wealth of Nations’ pays little attention to it
I was in Sloterdijk, Amsterdam,
where Marx’s original works are keep(IISH)
and later at the Institute for Marxism-Leninism 
in Berlin, GDR, in 1980 or 82
I was discussing with Jungnickel(Jürgen),
who read the unpublished works
and published them in german
I say to him: -Have you seen the difference 
between Labour Power and Living Labour
-Yes.
-But, have you seen how Living Labor “creates” 
Surplus Value?
-Ah!, no, we haven’t seen that
discussing with an editor of Marx,
but the kind of editor who reads the manuscripts
and edits them in german language
i.e., the people who know the most
about Marx in the world!
we met with the vice-president of the institute,
these were the hard times
the orthodox times of communist Germany
the seven editors,
Marx works in german,
and we started a discussion
and I convinced them about a couple of things 
that they never thought before
then I said to myself: -Heavens!, it seems that
in the seminary at 'UNAM' 
we have gone deep,
we know more than Marx editors
more than Marx’s editors!,
