Marxist theory neglects how conquest shapes capitalist insertion of conquered strata

Evidence

Against this teleological extrapolation, it must be said that the fact of conquest, and thus the very different conditions in which pre-conquest social strata have been inserted into the capitalist mode, have not, on the whole played a central role in the versions of Marxist theory usually applied to such post-conquest societies. (The difficulty of deciding precisely what was the nature of the American slave systems—clearly inaugurated within yet separate from the expanding mercantile capitalist phase—is an aspect of the same theoretical problem [Genovese 1965; Hindess and Hirst 1975]). — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 602

Categorization

• QUESTION: Worth chasing: how did the American slave-systems debate (Genovese vs. Hindess and Hirst) frame this same problem, and what would a conquest-sensitive Marxism look like?
• XREF: Echoes the Frankfurt School readings on how inherited post-conquest and post-colonial social structure resists neat capitalist-stage teleologies.