I wrote:
> >[*] BTW, would Michael Perelman's THE INVENTION OF CAPITALISM be considered
> >"Eurocentric"? If so, does it have the same horrible political conclusions
> >that Louis attributes to Brenner? Should people be urged to denounce it
> >with the same fervor that Brenner is denounced?
Louis writes:
>If Perelman wrote broadsides against Baran and Sweezy in NLR, I would not
>only denounce him, I'd bite off his ear.
did Brenner attack Baran and Sweezy in a way that was uncomradely? did he
attribute unpleasant motives to them or draw out disgusting or reactionary
political implications of their theory that were _prima facie_ indicators
that their theory should be flushed down the toilet without any further
discussion? did he criticize them _because_ they were "third worldist" (or
whatever) or did he instead point to logical, factual, or methodological
holes in their theories? is it contrary to all that is true and beautiful
to criticize the ideas of leftist "elder statesmen" like Baran & Sweezy? is
there a reason why Marx's principle of "ruthless criticism of all existing"
should exempt them?
BTW, their theory (as represented by their MONOPOLY CAPITAL and Baran's
POLITICAL ECONOMY OF GROWTH) have a lot of holes. Is recognition of the
limitations of this theory a sin?
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
