>Michael Lind (The Next American Nation) makes the point
>that patents, IP, and professional licensure (i.e.,
>tenure!) are the upper-class ("white overclass") variant
>of protectionism.
>
>Consistent free-traders should be willing to do away
>with those barriers to trade as well. How do laissez
>faire econ profs justify tenure?
>
>mbs
>
You do know that unlike say Krugman and deLong the economists
Bhagwati and Srinivasan have been very vocal critics of IPR regimes
and regional trade acts (Srinivasan was critical of Big Boy Wonder
Summer's greater indulgence for the latter in the early 90s, I
believe, and they had some exchange in a learned journal, no?). I
believe that Doug was a reader for Lord Meghnad Desai's forthcoming
Verso book on globalization I very much look forward to reading his
analysis of contemporary capitalism. (I certainly don't want to read
anymore of his--i believe--wrong-headed technical analysis of the
transformation problem.)
Michael told me not to insult anyone, so I will hold back my comments
on the neo-nativist and self-proclaimed Listian Lind, who was hidden
in a trojan horse offered to the left by Buckley and co. But once it
was brought within the gates, I for one was not surprised that out
came another faux intellectual windbag like Jim Sleeper whose good
friend he is.
Yours, Rakesh
