Re: Enjoying Orthodoxy (was Re: Peter Dorman and Robin Hahnel)

>In a message dated 6/22/00 1:06:54 AM Eastern Daylight Time, >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > ><< I get to play an "Orthodox Marxist" perhaps > only in the minds of posters on LBO-talk & PEN-L. :) > > Given my views on sex, gender, sexuality, and many other topics, I > couldn't have been called "Or

Unsubscribe

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Tax the Dead, TheyWon'tMind

>Brad, you were listed in the acknowledgments of the Williamson - >O'Rourke book. >Their idea is that the migration from Ireland would limit mobility in the U.S. >and maybe raise it in Ireland. Limit mobility for *native born* Americans... But the act of moving from Ireland to America in the ni

Re: new zealand

Michael Yates wrote: > > Not long ago, on one of these lists, there was a post about the > rejuvenation of the NZ Labor Party and the reversal of some of the > anti-labor policies of previous Labor and National governments. Can > anyone in the know on these matters comment? Has the NZ Labor Par

The Internet Anti-Fascist: Tuesday, 23 May 2000 -- 4:43 (#424)

--- Sponsor's Message -- Knowledge is power, but at AllPredict it’s also cash and prizes! Test how knowledgeable you are and get rewarded for making accurate predictions. Let’s AllPredict the future at: http://click.topica.com/oWbz8SnrbAjwjxa/EducationAd12

Re: Mine's just so smart!

I wasn't sure if Justin had earlier told Mine to hit the books. His language was ambiguous. In any case, we are in trouble when one of us becomes the subject of our conversations. I have asked Mine to cool it, and so far she has, except in this case where she may/may not have been the offender.

Re: Mine's just so smart!

Don't be too hard on Mine. We all remember when we were in graduate school and knew everything before we had read it. I just wish that the internet was around when I was there. I could have gone on and bashed professors without any fear of reprisals. Unfortunately I had to do it in the Graduate St

Mine's just so smart!

Once again, all I can say before I get on a 20 some hour flight with long connections just to catch some jass in Montreal is, wow Mine, you're so smart you can talk to Justin Schwartz like he's so dumb...wish I were that smart... Mine wrote: I don't have time because I have sepent with this lis

Re: Re: Re: Definition of Political Economy(fwd)

In a message dated 6/22/00 4:11:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << Radical feminists do not find them perfect either. That being said, however, they were the ones who first raised the question of Women in Marxism. >> >What about August Bebel, whose Woman Under Socialis

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Tax the Dead, They Won't Mind

In a message dated 6/22/00 6:02:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << Well, perhaps not quite a graduate student who is going to be tenured some day, >> A mythical creature, like the unicorn and the centaur. More likely the graduate student will be detenured and go to law

Re: Re: Re: Functional Explanation

In a message dated 6/22/00 4:19:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << Perhaps you meant something else, but the following passage sure sounded like functionalism--not functional adaption-- to me. Joel Blau Thus (in the dated example of my paper), welfare > is function

Re: Re: Re: Definition of Political Economy(fwd)

In a message dated 6/22/00 4:11:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << Radical feminists do not find them perfect either. That being said, however, they were the ones who first raised the question of Women in Marxism. >> What about August Bebel, whose Woman Under Socialism

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "Orthodox Marxism"

In a message dated 6/22/00 3:52:28 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << The habit of replacing principled argument with charges of dogmatism or sectarianism (which, properly used, are always self-criticisms) is a character flaw. Carrol >> I know, people complain, but I d

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Definition of Political Eco...

In a message dated 6/22/00 1:54:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << rad queries: >I hadn't known that. Sources? Now I'm curious enough that I'll spend the >morning re-reading it... unfortunately, this is something I picked up in a philosophy class taken many years a

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Definition of Political Economy (fwd)

In a message dated 6/22/00 11:28:28 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << The Subjection of Women_; _On Liberty_; and _Representative Government_ still stand up pretty well. The "Essay on Bentham" is a sensitive positive critique of utilitarianism. And it seems to me like

Re: Enjoying Orthodoxy (was Re: Peter Dorman and Robin Hahnel (...

In a message dated 6/22/00 1:06:54 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << I get to play an "Orthodox Marxist" perhaps only in the minds of posters on LBO-talk & PEN-L. :) Given my views on sex, gender, sexuality, and many other topics, I couldn't have been called "Orthod

Sorry: A little thought or two (fwd)

I apologize for this private correspondence. I really thought I sent this to Doyle's address, and somehow it mistakenly went to the list. sorry again.. Doyle sorry! I did not do it on purpose... Mine Doyran -- Forwarded message -- Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 21:28:52 EDT From: [

Re: Marx's Accomplishments.

> I think that a market environment encourages individualism, but the application of rat choice came first with Smith, not Marx. Who said Marx was first? Hell, Smith wasn't first. Hobbes was earlier and HE wasn't first. > And Marx, unlike the rat choice types, saw "preferences" as endoge

Re: Re: RE: Re: Gary Graham

O.K. It's less popular than ever, but still popular enough to carry the day, in the absence of strong counter-vailing arguments. mbs -Original Message- From: Doug Henwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thursday, June 22, 2000 4:21 PM Subject: [PEN-L:

A little thought or two (fwd)

Dear Doyle, Those jerks deserve more than I said, but I just felt like not throwing gas to the fire any longer. As always, I am very much appreciated by your supportive remarks and sincere comments, and will continue the struggle against those unjustly attacking people! in solidarity, Mine >

GA Cohen

I said: . I think Cohen was right that >historical materialism is basically functional explanation,a nd I approve of >historical materialism. Jim responds > Cohen's version of historical materialism . . . is a bunch of transhistorical and thus unhistorical abstractions that say little o

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Tax the Dead, They Won'tMind

Brad, you were listed in the acknowledgments of the Williamson - O'Rourke book. Their idea is that the migration from Ireland would limit mobility in the U.S. and maybe raise it in Ireland. Most of what I have read about the end of slavery, seems to suggest that upward mobility for freed slaves w

RE: Re: Gary Graham

At 03:16 PM 6/22/00 -0700, you wrote: >Now, that the Death Penalty is becoming less popular, you can bet that >some people will opportunistically jump on the band wagon. The whole >system is disgusting. In the recent issue of the NATION, Hitchens argues that it's not the Democrats who are lea

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Tax the Dead, They Won'tMind

>Michael Perelman wrote: > >>My question has to do with the trends in this statistic. Is it worse today >>than in earlier times? > >Studies of mobility over the last several decades come up with >conflicting results. And that's with pretty good data. Anything that >purported to measure 19th cen

Re: RE: Re: Gary Graham

Max Sawicky wrote: >Not necessarily, Jimbo. The DP is not much less >popular than ever. POLL RELEASES February 24, 2000 Support for Death Penalty Drops to Lowest Level in 19 Years, Although Still High at 66% Widespread agreement, even among

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Tax the Dead, They Won't Mind

Michael Perelman wrote: >My question has to do with the trends in this statistic. Is it worse today >than in earlier times? Studies of mobility over the last several decades come up with conflicting results. And that's with pretty good data. Anything that purported to measure 19th century mob

Re: How We Live Today in America

In this genre, there is also the 1967 Fortune magazine prediction that by 2000, wages would rise another 150%. Joel Blau Jim Devine wrote: > "By 2000, the machines will be producing so much that everyone in the U.S. > will, in effect, be independently wealthy. With government benefits, even > n

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Tax the Dead, They Won't Mind

Jim Devine wrote: > Michael Perelman wrote: > > > My question has to do with the trends in this statistic. Is it worse today > > than in earlier times? Hence the drive to reopen the frontier, through imperial expansion. If you want to push this argument a little farther, you could even corr

How We Live Today in America

"By 2000, the machines will be producing so much that everyone in the U.S. will, in effect, be independently wealthy. With government benefits, even nonworking families will have, by one estimate, an annual income of $30,000-$40,000 (in 1966 dollars). How to use leisure meaningfully will be a

Re: Gary Graham

At 03:16 PM 6/22/00 -0700, you wrote: >Now, that the Death Penalty is becoming less popular, you can bet that >some people will opportunistically jump on the band wagon. The whole >system is disgusting. In the recent issue of the NATION, Hitchens argues that it's not the Democrats who are lea

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Tax the Dead, They Won't Mind

Michael Perelman wrote: > My question has to do with the trends in this statistic. Is it worse today > than in earlier times? Joel Blau wrote: >I think so. My sense is that there has been a petrification of the U.S. class >structure, one which may allow some movement between the lower quintil

Gary Graham

Nailing GW for this murder is easy. He mocked Carla Fay Tucker and vetoed legislation to make a strong defense easier for indigent defendents. Yet, looking at Texas from Cal., I see that our own "liberal" governor has allowed equally questionable executions. He has also tried to put law and ord

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Tax the Dead, They Won't Mind

I think so. My sense is that there has been a petrification of the U.S. class structure, one which may allow some movement between the lower quintiles, but simply on a numerical basis, offers less probability of sling-shotting yourself from the bottom to the top. Joel Blau Michael Perelman wrote

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Tax the Dead, They Won't Mind

Well, perhaps not quite a graduate student who is going to be tenured some day, but it is certainly not intergenerational. On that score, my memory is that if your family is in the bottom fifth, you have about a 40% chance of rising to the middle (sorry, without rumaging around a lot, I can't give

new zealand

Not long ago, on one of these lists, there was a post about the rejuvenation of the NZ Labor Party and the reversal of some of the anti-labor policies of previous Labor and National governments. Can anyone in the know on these matters comment? Has the NZ Labor Party really moved left? Have the u

Re: Re: Re: Re: Tax the Dead, They Won't Mind

My question has to do with the trends in this statistic. Is it worse today than in earlier times? Joel Blau wrote: > Not good. In any five year period, there is only a 10% chance of somebody > rising from the bottom to the middle quintile. > -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California

Re: Re: Re: Re: Tax the Dead, They Won't Mind

>Not good. In any five year period, there is only a 10% chance of somebody >rising from the bottom to the middle quintile. > >Joel Blau That's my household from 1983 to 1988. But that *ain't* socio-economic mobility in any *real* sense... that's finishing graduate school. Brad deLong

Re: Re: Re: Tax the Dead, They Won't Mind

Not good. In any five year period, there is only a 10% chance of somebody rising from the bottom to the middle quintile. Joel Blau Michael Perelman wrote: > Doug is probably correct, but I think that the question should revolve > around the chance for social mobility. I suspect that it was hig

Re: Re: Tax the Dead, They Won't Mind

Doug is probably correct, but I think that the question should revolve around the chance for social mobility. I suspect that it was higher -- No, I don't have the data -- in the 1820's than today. Foner's image of the free labor ideal was not entirely a fantasy for white men. Land, even though

Re: Re: Functional Explanation

Perhaps you meant something else, but the following passage sure sounded like functionalism--not functional adaption-- to me. Joel Blau Thus (in the dated example of my paper), welfare > is functionally explained in capitalism because of its function in damping > social unrest, stabilizing the

Re: Re: Definition of Political Economy(fwd)

>>And it seems to me likely that Harriet Taylor had more fun than Jenny >>von >>Westphalen... >No use pretending Marx was as sensitive a feminist as Mill (although the >former was well ahead of the pack in this regard), >Rob. J. S. Mill and Harriet Taylor are the architects of what came to be

Marx and India

There's an article in Aijaz Ahmad's "In Theory: Classes, Nations and Literatures" titled "Marx on India: a Clarification" that was written as a reply to Edward Said. Said had included Marx as a "Eurocentric" in his polemic against Orientalism. The problem is that the articles that figure in Said's

Re: Re: Re: Re: "Orthodox Marxism"

Doug Henwood wrote: > "Childish," "slovenl[y]," "fucking lazy." Thank god those aren't > labels, just mere descriptions. Both. Dogmatism, when it occurs, is a political and/or intellectual error. The habit of replacing principled argument with charges of dogmatism or sectarianism (which, prop

Re: Re: Re: "Orthodox Marxism"

Carrol Cox wrote: >I really don't understand something. You, Doug, others on this list are >forceful writers, well read, widely knowledgeable, quite capable of >carrying out a principled argument on most topics. So why then are you >so fucking lazy intellectually? Do you really need this crutch o

Re: Re: "Orthodox Marxism"

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > . But I did mean to attack dogmatic Marxists, who of course will deny thatthey are >being dogmatic, but who respond to any criticism of Marx, engels, Lenin, and >sometimes Trotsky with a porcupine response, I really don't understand something. You, Doug, others on

Re: Definition of Political Economy(fwd)

>well." _Considerations of Representative Government_, read (against >the grain) as description of liberal democracy and not as an apologia >of it, beautifully summarizes what it is. >Yoshie good point Yoshie, but this is what "liberal democracy" is all about, so _Considerations of Represent

Re: Re: Tax the Dead, They Won't Mind

>Brad De Long wrote: > >>If this Republican tide does sweep over the land, there will still >>be a country called "America." But that country will lack much of >>what made America special, and lovely. > >Just when was it that the U.S. was not a place where inherited >wealth mattered a lot? I th

Harriet Taylor (was Re: Definition of Political Economy (fwd))

>In one of his prefaces J.S. Mill thanks Harriet Taylor profusely and says >that because he discussed the material with her so thoroughly, she should be >considered a co-author. This has been taken by some and transferred into >statements similar to those that Jim repeated. > >Rod Rod means the p

Re: Re: Re: Definition of Political Economy(fwd)

This essay had little to do with India. Marx wrote it to undermine the influence of Henry Carey, who was sabotaging Marx's relationship at the Tribune and gaining a great deal of influence with the workers movement in Germany by way of the Duehring. I had a chapter telling this story in my Marx

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Peter Dorman and Robin Hahnel (fwd)

> I don't view Marxian dialectical method as a neutral "toolkit," nor did I say I did. Who said anything about "neutral"? Not moi. I assume that if you ask questions about class and exploitation, you do so because you have answered the question in your mind, which side am I on? But my point wa

Re: Tax the Dead, They Won't Mind

Brad De Long wrote: >If this Republican tide does sweep over the land, there will still >be a country called "America." But that country will lack much of >what made America special, and lovely. Just when was it that the U.S. was not a place where inherited wealth mattered a lot? I thought U.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Definition of Political

> and many people say that Harriet T. likely wrote _The Subjection of Women_ > but thought that she couldn't get it published under her name. > Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine I think there is more to above. Harriet Taylor wrote essay entitled *The Emancipati

Tax the Dead, They Won't Mind--Learning from Eric Foner--Did YouMention Placement Help?

> > >You too can be a much-reviled pundit. > >On June 8 the House repealed the Federal >Estate and Gift Tax, our most progressive >tax. Repeal is now up for consideration in >the Senate. Everything you need to know >aobut it is in the links included herein. > >Any questions, feel free to drop me

Re: Re: "Orthodox Marxism"

Justin: > Louis Proyect is a proud defender of this pattern of behavior; he also regards me as beneath contempt, a filthy right wing renegade, a nasty social democratic turncoat, a class traitor and enemy of the people, who ought to crawl back to the Heritage Foundation and stop exposing innocent

Re: "Orthodox Marxism"

I said: The style of orthodox Marxism is of course a guarantee that no one will talk to you who is not already a true believer. Doyle That turn of phrase I recall from the old days of the sixties from the philosopher, Eric Hoffer. Where Hoffer theorized the Marxist left as being "true believer

Re: Functional Explanation

Don't confuse functionalISM, the doctrine maintained by the likes of Talcott Parsons, which says that all im,portant features of society are "functional," with functional EXPLANATION, a pattern of explanation used in biology and the social sciences, and applicable to some phenomena but biy nece

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Definition ofPolitical Economy (fwd)

In one of his prefaces J.S. Mill thanks Harriet Taylor profusely and says that because he discussed the material with her so thoroughly, she should be considered a co-author. This has been taken by some and transferred into statements similar to those that Jim repeated. Rod Jim Devine wrote: >

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Definition of Political Economy (fwd)

I wrote: >>and many people say that Harriet T. likely wrote _The Subjection of >>Women_ but thought that she couldn't get it published under her name. Brad queries: >I hadn't known that. Sources? Now I'm curious enough that I'll spend the >morning re-reading it... unfortunately, this is someth

Re: Definition of Political Economy(fwd)

Hi Rob: Forget "Eurocentrism" of Mill & Marx for a moment -- my intention was to _confirm_ Brad's claim: Mill's writings "still stand up pretty well." _Considerations of Representative Government_, read (against the grain) as description of liberal democracy and not as an apologia of it, bea

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Definition of Political Economy (fwd)

>At 08:20 PM 6/21/00 -0700, you wrote: >>>Marx's complain against J. S. Mill was that he was mediocre, and looked good >>>simply because the competition was so dreadful. Mediocre because he confined >>>himself to study surface phenomena, rather than to look at the real motor of >>>history. >>> >>>

Re: Re: Re: Definition of Political Economy(fwd)

> >And, having said all that, it was a lot easier being a JSM than a KM, too. >Ya gotta watch the implicit individualism your education has been stuffing >into you all these years, mate - these blokes lived in very different >contexts. > >Cheers, >Rob. Very true... Brad DeLong

Re: Re: Definition of Political Economy(fwd)

C'mon Yoshie, You wouldn't have to bust a gut to find a bit of (almost unavoidable, in the 1850s) eurocentrism in Marx's writings. Some of that Asiatic Mode of Production stuff, is a little simplistic, no? And then there's his 'The Future Results of British Rule in India' - stuff like : 'India

Forwarded from Tom Lehman

Subject: The American Labor Movement Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 10:36:38 -0400 From: Tom Lehman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: USWA To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Definition of Political Economy(fwd)

She spent her weekends with her husband and JSM. I recall that she often could not walk, except when it was time for their vacation in France -- but I could be mistaken on that. Brad De Long wrote: > >Marx's complain against J. S. Mill was that he was mediocre, and looked good > >simply because

Re: Definition of Political Economy(fwd)

Not my assessment, but Marx's. And he was referring to the Principles of Political Economy, not to the works you list. I happen to like J.S. Mill although I have an aversion to his father. Rod Brad De Long wrote: > >Marx's complain against J. S. Mill was that he was mediocre, and looked good >

Re: Definition of Political Economy(fwd)

> >_The Subjection of Women_; _On Liberty_; and _Representative > >Government_ still stand up pretty well. The "Essay on Bentham" is a > >sensitive positive critique of utilitarianism. > >I have to agree, Brad. And all gorgeously written, too. From J. S. Mill, _Considerations of Representative

Re: Re: Re: Definition of Political Economy (fwd)

Steuart published his book in 1767, although much of it was written decades before -- possibly lifted from Cantillon. The term, political economy, was first used by Montechretian in the 17th C. The idea was that term economy, concerned the management of an estate. Political economy meant that t

Re: Re: Definition of Political Economy(fwd)

>_The Subjection of Women_; _On Liberty_; and _Representative >Government_ still stand up pretty well. The "Essay on Bentham" is a >sensitive positive critique of utilitarianism. I have to agree, Brad. And all gorgeously written, too. >And it seems to me likely that Harriet Taylor had more

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Definition of Political Economy (fwd)

At 08:20 PM 6/21/00 -0700, you wrote: >>Marx's complain against J. S. Mill was that he was mediocre, and looked good >>simply because the competition was so dreadful. Mediocre because he confined >>himself to study surface phenomena, rather than to look at the real motor of >>history. >> >>Rod > >

social security

Here in Pittsburgh a group of leftists and progresive unionists have proposed to the Central Labor Council the formation of an education group. We met today with the president of the Council with our proposal. He responded very favorably. One of the things we proposed was the development of lab

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Definition of Political Economy(fwd)

>Marx's complain against J. S. Mill was that he was mediocre, and looked good >simply because the competition was so dreadful. Mediocre because he confined >himself to study surface phenomena, rather than to look at the real motor of >history. > >Rod > _The Subjection of Women_; _On Liberty_; and

Re: Re: Dying for Growth

At 08:33 PM 06/21/2000 -0700, you wrote: >Jim Devine wrote: > > > If growth is democratically planned, then it's hard to imagine that > > growth of "output" would be the only criterion. There would be much more > > attention to issues of quality -- and issues such as the definition of > > what in

RE: Re: Re: "Jerks", was Re: Peter Dorman and RobinHahnel

No foreign epithets allowed. Only domestic. Instead of w*, there is the perfectly good U.S. term of pud-whacker. mbs Fair Trade Coalition Greetings Economists, Doug Henwood asks if I give my permission to use the word "Wanker". I grant Doug Henwood permission to use the word Wanker. He m

Re: Re: name calling (fwd)

...and the jabs keep coming. I wish more folks would take time out to realise that the personal insult is more damaging to communication than it is corrective of behaviour. A little self- (read ego-) sacrificial, I mean modest, questioning -- even if it only poses as modest -- would be far mor

Gary Graham's lawyer

(This is from a NY Times article by Raymond Bonner and Sara Rimer, dated June 11, that deals with the incompetence of Gary Graham's (aka Shaka Sankofa) court-appointed lawyer. Bonner is a fiercely courageous journalist who was removed from his post in Central America in the 1980s by editor A.M. Ro

Gusinsky

Good that people like Boris Kagarlitsky is checking in with PEN-L but only if the rest of us have an interest in the detail of developments in Russia will this be helpful. The dramatic news this week of Gusinky's arrest is important. I see from the International Herald Tribune that he has used

Re: Stratfor (was: Boris Kagarlitsky)

At 08:59 21/06/00 +, you wrote: > The shadowy think-tank Stratfor also made this > >analysis and threw China into the mix. Some of this seems plausible in > >light of the Nato bombing of the Chinese embassy. > > >Amusing to here you call Stratfor a shadowy think-tank as it really is >neither.

Re: Entertaining Dogma (was Re: Peter Dorman andRobin Hahnel)

Title: Re: [PEN-L:20535] Entertaining Dogma (was Re: Peter Dorman and Robin Hahnel) Greetings Economists,    An interesting reply from Yoshie.  First I want to somehow convey how much I appreciate your thoughts Yoshie on so many subjects.  Especially what you wrote not to me but to jks, Yoshie