Petras in _Critical Perspectives on Imperialism and Social Class in the
Third World, Monthly Press, New York, 1978_
gave a not unsympathetic nod to the "bureaucratic collectivist"
interpretration (minus the late shactmanite line natch!) of the nature of
the Soviet type societies. Another thing, that person whose name I have been
forbidden to utter, might disagree with Petras on?
Michael Pugliese
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen E Philion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 12:39 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:11120] Re: Re: Re: the enemy's statistics
>
> On Wed, 2 May 2001, Louis Proyect wrote:
> > key. Might I recommend books you might find useful to understand the
> > phenomenon of stagnation:
> >
> > 5. James Petras, "Dynamics of Social Change in Latin America"
> >
> > I have found them extremely useful and I am sure that so would you.
> >
> Lou, I've always wondered, since you frequently refer to James Petras as
> one of the Marxists you greatly admire, where do you stand on Petras'
> criticisms of dependency/World Systems Theory, especially his rather
> *explicit* agreement with Brenner's criticisms of these theoretical
> approaches. Brenner is taken to task by you for the similar reasons that
> you take on Doug so frequently. Isn't this somewhat inconsistent?
>
>
> Steve
>
