I was intrigued by Stavros M.'s contribution to the discussion on Aglietta. As regards his fundamental critique of Regulation Theory, he will find much the same will apply to my own work and SSA theory in general. (Plug: Social Structures of Accumulation: The Political Economy of Growth and Crisis, Ed. Kotz, McDonough, Reich esp. SSA's Contingent History, and Stages of Capitalism, by T. McDonough). I tend to agree with him on some points and disagree on others. Agreement: I have always been uncomfortable with this notion of "intermediate concepts". It has always struck me that the existing levels are those of abstract theoretical conceptualization and the application of theory to concrete historical analysis. I do think however that there are intermediate periods in capitalist history. There are tendencies in capitalism which operate over its entire history and then there are institutional structures which are peculiar to particular periods of capitalist history, finally there is the conjuncture which is a particular point in history. The institutional structures are produced as a result of historical class struggle and in turn condition that struggle. The conflictual nature of capitalism and the need for security of return for longterm investment creates the need for relatively stable institutions of an economic, political and ideological/cultural nature. Hence these are not intermediate concepts but are necessitated by and hence part of the Marxian analysis of the historical dynamics of the capitalist mode of production. This kind of approach is not peculiar to the post-60's crisis, but originates with the work of Hilferding, Bukharin and Lenin. (Another plug: see my Lenin, Imperialism, and the Stages of Capitalist Development, S&S Fall 95), and thus dates from the start of the Marxist tradition after Marx. (Interestingly Aglietta rejects continuity with Lenin's tradition arguing that it is not Marxist enough.) Thus while I agree that intermediate concepts have no theoretical status and may lead to the problems described by Stavros, the intermediate periodization of capitalism is necessitated by the conjunction of the basic Marxian concepts and concrete history. Disagreement: Contingency is not an intensification of the problem of intermediate concepts but the way out of the dilemma. If the specifics of a particular period cannot be explained by the overarching laws of capitalist development, this implies that there are contingent factors at play. Contingent factors are influences outside of the fundamental factors which provide the overall motion of historical change. This dichotomy between contingent and fundamental factors allows for concrete historical explanation without the introduction of a "multicausal framework" at the highest level of theory. A similar view of Darwinian evolution is propounded by the paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould in 'Wonderful Life.' Terry McDonough