>
>
> > >You have to admit Laclau fried Geras in his response. Wood
> > >simply misunderstood what Laclau was about.
> >
> > No you don't. I thought that it was quitew the other way around.
>
>I thought you were a pragmatist and not a crude materialist which
>was the philosophical stand from which Geras attacked L&M.
I don't have to agree with Geras' total philosophy to see that his attacks
on L&M's arguments are effective and well-founded. He does rather go at it
with a shovel rather than a scapel, but when he's done, they're buried. Btw,
I am a pragmatist who is a scientific realist, although one with a healthy
respect for antirealist arguments.
--jks
>
>the below came from Carrol, not me.
Right, I knew that, but it's still a bizarre thing to say.
--jks
> > >To attack Wood is to
> > > > praise Laclau. Either/Or. Also, any attack on Wood is a defense of
> > > > market socialism. She has written the only _marxist_ criticism of
> > > > it. All other criticisms of it are merely growls of disapproval,
> > > > without grounds for attacking it.
> >
> > That's a bizarre thing to say. I am, as you know, a market socialist.
> > But there are a lot of serious criticisms of MS, including some by
> > indisputable Marxists, e.g., Ernest Mandel. Wood's attack on MS does
> > not strike me as particularly impressive, certainly not in comparison
> > to Mandel.
> >
> > --jks
> > >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________ Get
> > your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
> >
>
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
