====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
On 10/5/10 8:38 PM, Charlie wrote: > At the financial top, though, capital seems much more labile and > undifferentiated, nothing like the classic antagonisms of agriculture > versus transportation, industry versus merchants, industry versus > finance, heavy industry versus light industry, middle-sized firms versus > monopolies, etc. Some of these antagonisms helped divide the ruling > class on FDR in the 1930s (to the point of support him or mount a coup > against him), but what is a similar material basis today? (Plug: See my > No Rich, No Poor for more.) > > Mr. Hodge would like to smudge the two themes in Madison. > Keep in mind that Harpers is not exactly a Marxist magazine. I would describe it as patrician radical, especially given the mindset of Lewis Lapham, its former long-term editor Lewis Lapham, who has a lot in common with Gore Vidal. In the latest issue, there's a really totally fucking stupid article by a character named Patrick Symmes about going to Cuba and trying to live for a month on Cuban wages. Symmes is the author of a book that is based on interviews with Fidel's schoolmates. Needless to say, they don't like him and neither does Symmes. But by and large, the magazine is much more tolerable than The Nation Magazine. ________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
