I think the big issue is not getting rid of the word "radical" but defining
what it means these days. When I talk to my orthodox colleagues it isn't
the radical that bothers them but whether we are doing anything relevant
or simply just trying to hold on to the old faith. I think its important
On Tue, 30 Aug 1994, Ajit Sinha wrote:
As I see it, three issues have been raised in the population discussion:
(1) Urbanization as population policy (Cindy Cotter),
(2) Education as repressive device (Doug Henwood), and
(3) Education as an essential device (Peter Robertson).
No no no
Doug, this is an oversimplification, but it's a bit like: you're a radical who
does desktop publishing as against a practitioner of "radical desktop
publishing". Of course, the analogy breaks down at various points, since
political economy is not apolitical. But it is not (or at least need not
Better yet (more in line with this way of thinking-e.g., message below),
why not simply call it "economics" and forget about the adjective
"political" as well as "radical"?
there already are organizations and journals that fill these spaces? why
shouldn't there continue to be one that is not
It strikes me as naive to believe that one could hide one's political stance by
keeping words like radical off of one's resume. If one is so deep in the
closet waiting out the seven years to a tenure decision, I suspect it would be
hard to find the door at that time. But let's do an empirical
Response to Ellen McCrate: Piven and Cloward mention this issue
in *Regulating the Poor*, but I don't remember seeing detailed
documentation there.
Michael Brun
--
Michael J. Brun ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
408 W. Elm, #3, Urbana, IL 61801, USA, (217) 344-5961
An organization called UPE will attract different people and develop
in a different way than an organization called URPE. Calling ourselves
"radical political economists" was already a compromise with the fear
of being labelled "Marxist economists." Are we going to end up with
an organization
First, I don't think the word "radical" should be dropped to improve anyone's
career chances. It is a matter of principle. Having said that, I will admit
to having expunged RRPE articles from my vita, but the real boost came when I
also eliminated *any* publication outside the narrow specialty
I do think some of the recent postings on the URPE name change issue
are missing the serious point and attending instead to more trivial
matters, such as what difference the name makes on resumes. The real issue
concerns the audience accessible to those of us who believe there is
a better
I am receiving many messages in duplicate. Is anyone else so
afflicted? Is there anything I can do to remedy the problem?
Thanks.
Brian Eggleston
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Posted on 31 Aug 1994 at 17:32:31 by Uriacc Mailer (002033)
Re: URPE = UPE?
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 1994 14:31:31 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: "Chris Barrett" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I do think some of the recent postings on the URPE name change issue
are missing the serious point and
11 matches
Mail list logo
