Hi Jim:
>Actually, it's not exactly on the mark. I want to emphasize that the
>problem is not mainstream methods _per se_ as much as the way that
>the Analytical Marxists decided that _only_ mainstream methods (for
>example, Walrasian general equilibrium theory and game theory for
>Roemer) were valid. The problem is not GE or game theory as much as
>the assumption that only these methods (and the like) were valid.
>This kind of reductionism led to the AM school's fate. As I note,
>Brenner's status as an historian -- and thus as a real-world
>oriented person -- prevented him from going this way. Also, he's
>always been involved in political action (in the group Solidarity,
>that publishes AGAINST THE CURRENT). That helps avoid the academic
>trap.
I have a question. I realize that Robert Brenner identifies himself
with Analytical Marxism, but I'm not sure what exactly stamps
Brenner's work as Analytical Marxism (as opposed to other kinds of
Marxism).
Yoshie
