Re: Re: Re: Re: [Fwd: Position in the World-System andNationalEmissions of] (fwd)
Doug Henwood wrote: > M A Jones wrote: > > >But capitalism will collapse anyway. > > Right. Where have I heard that one before? Actually the prediction was made by many old guys millenia ago before capitalism was ever heard of. You know, the old stuff about the rise and fall of this or that. ONe doesn't have to be even remotely a marxist to know this. Now *dating* it -- that's something else. And of course it is also another quesion whether the collapse will be followed by socialism or barbarianism. But who can seriously object to the abstract proposition that "Capitalism will collapse." It seems a rather trivial tautology. Carrol
Re: Re: Re: Re: [Fwd: Position in the World-System andNationalEmissions of] (fwd)
Carrol Cox wrote: >Bullshit Doug. On the contrary, any statement of the kind you want >would be arrogant and stupid, not merely utopian. No one except >a few academics and journalists (I ignore sheer demogogues) has >ever taken up resistance to capitalism on the basis of being convinced >there is a "better system." Hmm, I can see it now, "Risk your livelihood, even your life, for an ineffable future!" Why would anyone take up resistance without even a hint of what they were fighting for? > And frankly I doubt the good faith of >anyone who asks such questions. This has all been very clarifying. Why am I reminded of that old joke about Rebels without a clue? Doug
Re: Re: Re: Re: [Fwd: Position in the World-System andNationalEmissions of] (fwd)
Well, Carroll, I certainly like to see you raise the level of discourse. So it's arrogant and stupid and in bad faith of Doug to ask for a reason to think that we could do better if we made some sort of change in a direction you would consider socialist. well, sign me up to the arrogant, stupid, and bad faith list. Of course one will be convinced to join up on the basis of such ana rgument, but if we don't have it, we are losers in the ideological war. In case you didn't notice, the last 200 or so times we tried going at the thing blind we fucked up. The working class has certainly noticed that little fact. I think it is attitudes like yours that have helped to stick us in this ghetto who all we can do is snarl at each other. --jks Bullshit Doug. On the contrary, any statement of the kind you want would be arrogant and stupid, not merely utopian. No one except a few academics and journalists (I ignore sheer demogogues) has ever taken up resistance to capitalism on the basis of being convinced there is a "better system." And frankly I doubt the good faith of anyone who asks such questions. Carrol >>
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: [Fwd: Position in the World-System andNationalEmissions of] (fwd)
Is this in contrast to non-trivial tautologies? Cheers, Ken Hanly Carrol Cox wrote: > Doug Henwood wrote: > > > M A Jones wrote: > > > > >But capitalism will collapse anyway. > > > > Right. Where have I heard that one before? > > Actually the prediction was made by many old guys millenia ago > before capitalism was ever heard of. You know, the old stuff about > the rise and fall of this or that. ONe doesn't have to be even remotely > a marxist to know this. Now *dating* it -- that's something else. > > And of course it is also another quesion whether the collapse will > be followed by socialism or barbarianism. But who can seriously > object to the abstract proposition that "Capitalism will collapse." > It seems a rather trivial tautology. > > Carrol
