The hypocrisy of US foreign policy requires no comment, although no dount it demands
outrage. But no one outside his thuggish clique could mourn the defeat of Milosovic.
--jks
In a message dated Mon, 25 Sep 2000 12:06:24 AM Eastern Daylight Time, "Ken Hanly"
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The hypocrisy of US foreign policy requires no comment, although no dount
it demands outrage. But no one outside his thuggish clique could mourn the
defeat of Milosovic. --jks
===
This accusation of "thuggish" reflects imperialist propaganda. Given the
pressures on it, the Milosevic government
I am not surprised, but I am disappointed, to find Louis falling in with the defense
of the Milosovic regime, even to comparing it with the Sandinistas, whose mistakes
were at least part of a policy of promoting a government policy intendedto promote the
welfare of ordinary Nicaraguans, rather
Justin:
"Whatever was socialist in the Yugoslav economy is gone, except for some
ideological window dressing that no one even pretends to believe any more.
Moreover, the M regime that participated in the partition by force of
Yugoslavia, supported the Bosnian serbs in the Bosnian war, and engaged
Max Sawicky wrote:
I suppose if others predict crisis every six months or so, and I never
predict one, eventually they'll be right and I'll be wrong. What's the
opposite of a broken clock that's right once a day? Maybe an electric
clock that keeps the right time until the lights go out.
I
Ken, you forget that here in the "land of the free," the word "democracy"
(or "having a hard transition to democracy") is synonymous with loyalty to
the US.
Second, I think it's interesting that the State Department is making
analogies with the "people power" overthrow of Marcos. Didn't the
On 25 Sep 00, at 11:21, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am not surprised, but I am disappointed, to find Louis falling in with the defense
of the Milosovic regime, even to comparing it with the Sandinistas, whose mistakes
were at least part of a policy of promoting a government policy intendedto
The subject of Yugoslavia is so contentious, that I suspect that we will not
get very far here. Whatever Milosovic's economic
achievements might be, I abhor the nationalism that he represented. The US
has succeeded in demonizing M., even though his
nationalism was no different from that of
G'day all,
MP: Am I wrong to believe that the various warning signs are starting to
cluster closer and closer together?
[mbs] yes.
Me: Nope.
Worries about energy prices.
[mbs] Prices that are still low by historic standards?
Seems like we're confusing consumer griping with
world-historic
This is also Frank Hahn's argument, as I understand it. But Sraffian prices are
determined independently of demand. Now I suppose that one could set up one's
argument so that such a difference was presented as a "special case" -- a
"special case" where demand doesn't play any role, etc.-- but
I agree with Michael that this discussion is unlikely to be productive, and will not
debate apologists for Milosovic. If he is no worse that our own misleaders, he is also
no better. I remain an ignorant victim of NATO propaganda and blinkered by imperialist
hoodwinking . . . . --jks
In a
The subject of Yugoslavia is so contentious, that I suspect that we will not
get very far here. Whatever Milosovic's economic
achievements might be, I abhor the nationalism that he represented. The US
has succeeded in demonizing M...
Srebnitca?
Milosevic demonized himself.
How short memories
Calling someone an apologist is a way to calm things down. I have no
doubt that Milosovic is a thug, but I would also consider the Clinton-Bush
sanctions to be even more violent. Using such emotive language, as any
philosopher knows -- thuggish, apologist -- is sure to fan flames.
--
Michael
I don't mind if we demonize Milosevic, but I would like that demonization to be
spread equitably. Tujman was equally evil, yet the U.S. embraced him. More
interesting is the demonization of our former friends, as soon as they refuse to
go along with the US line.
Brad De Long wrote:
The difference seems to be that Sraffian prices are decidedly long run. That is why
the supply curves are horizontal. The Arrow-Debreu-Walras has no time whatsoever,
or all time is collapsed into a perfectly anticipated view of the future.
"Forstater, Mathew" wrote:
This is also Frank
Fabian, you are perfectly welcome to unsub. Just send a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
unsub pen-l.
I would rather that you stay and try to dialogue in a more amicable fashion. Carrol
was wrong to have written the way he did. I responded earlier regarding that post,
but calling people clowns
On 25 Sep 00, at 8:56, Perelman, Michael wrote:
The subject of Yugoslavia is so contentious, that I suspect that we will not
get very far here.
I don't disagree, but I do think it is important that we don't spread
misinformation on the list or let misinformation be left uncontested
so
Michael wrote:
Fabian, you are perfectly welcome to unsub. Just send a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
unsub pen-l.
I would rather that you stay and try to dialogue in a more amicable
fashion. Carrol was wrong to have written the way he did. I responded
earlier regarding that post, but calling
At 10:00 AM 9/25/00 -0700, you wrote:
The subject of Yugoslavia is so contentious, that I suspect that we will not
get very far here. Whatever Milosovic's economic
achievements might be, I abhor the nationalism that he represented. The US
has succeeded in demonizing M...
Srebnitca?
Milosevic
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 9/23/00 8:44:06 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
The only other relevant question is whether labor creates value. For those
who think not, they do not belong on PEN-L, but that's just my opinion.
Louis Proyect
Lou loves to
Don't forget, Marx considered circus performance to be productive labor.
Louis Proyect wrote:
Now wait just a gosh-darned minute. I regarded [being called a clown] a
compliment.
"Natural elements entering as agents into production, and which cost nothing, no
matter what role they play in production, do not enter as components of capital,
but as a free gifts of Nature to capital, that is, as a free gift of Nature's
productive power to labour." Vol. 3, p. 745
Justin:
"Whatever was socialist in the Yugoslav economy is gone, except for some
ideological window dressing that no one even pretends to believe any more.
Moreover, the M regime that participated in the partition by force of
Yugoslavia, supported the Bosnian serbs in the Bosnian war, and engaged
No, you are thinking about the passage at the start of the Critique of the Gotha
Program where Marx attacks the idea that labor creates all wealth, not value. For
MArx, value is by definition embodied labor. --jks
In a message dated Mon, 25 Sep 2000 2:57:38 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Doug
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/25/00 02:56PM
Wasn't Marx himself critical of the notion that only labor creates
value? I recall something about nature being a partner in the
enterprise.
(((
CB: In the terms of _Capital_ human labor is the source of all exchange-value.
Use-value comes from
At 02:59 PM 9/25/00 -0400, you wrote:
Wasn't Marx himself critical of the notion that only labor creates
value? I recall something about nature being a partner in the
enterprise.
for Marx, labor and nature both create use-values, whereas only labor
creates value. Use-values refer to the
I am seriously uninterested in who did what to whom first in Kosovo or elsewhere. That
always leads to the argument that it is OK for the first victim to do the same thing
back, a notion that I, geneally unsuccessfully, continually try to disabuse my kids of.
Kosovars are not innocent
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/25/00 04:01PM
At 02:59 PM 9/25/00 -0400, you wrote:
Wasn't Marx himself critical of the notion that only labor creates
value? I recall something about nature being a partner in the
enterprise.
for Marx, labor and nature both create use-values, whereas only labor
Michael Perelman wrote:
I wasn't predicting, just asking.
And not hoping?
Doug
Jim Devine says:
At 10:00 AM 9/25/00 -0700, you wrote:
The subject of Yugoslavia is so contentious, that I suspect that we will not
get very far here. Whatever Milosovic's economic
achievements might be, I abhor the nationalism that he represented. The US
has succeeded in demonizing M...
Warning signs of what? A slowdown in U.S. growth to 3%? To 0%? To
-10%? Is any of it meant to be good news?
Doug
Forstater, Mathew wrote:
"Natural elements entering as agents into production, and which cost
nothing, no
matter what role they play in production, do not enter as components
of capital,
but as a free gifts of Nature to capital, that is, as a free gift of Nature's
productive power to labour."
A dramatic economic reversal would cause considerable hardship at home.
A continuation of the "boom" will cause considerable hardship world wide
along with some benefits. The longer the neo-liberalism continues, the
harder it will be to reverse in the future.
So, I guess that a slowdown would
But Marx does not explicitly equate use-values with wealth in his opening
rebuttal sentence. Value, use-value and wealth are confused and entangled in
his retort. Is the source of use-values itself a use-value, a value or
wealth? Doug's query from a while back hits the last sentence below quite
I don't mind if we demonize Milosevic, but I would like that
demonization to be
spread equitably. Tujman was equally evil, yet the U.S. embraced him.
Really? The National Security Council staff when I was in the
government wished daily for his overthrow, with their wishes checked
only by the
I think that who is and who is not a "demon" depends on one's
political perspective.
I think that who is and who is not a demon depends on who acts like a demon.
We clearly disagree.
Brad DeLong
At 10:00 AM 9/25/00 -0700, you wrote:
The subject of Yugoslavia is so contentious, that I suspect that we will not
get very far here. Whatever Milosovic's economic
achievements might be, I abhor the nationalism that he represented. The US
has succeeded in demonizing M...
Srebnitca?
Milosevic
Really? The National Security Council staff when I was in the
government wished daily for his overthrow, with their wishes checked
only by the (vain) hope that Tudjman and Milosevic could be made to
cancel each other out, leaving the Bosnians free to stay alive and
keep their homes...
Brad
I am seriously uninterested in who did what to whom first in Kosovo
or elsewhere. That always leads to the argument that it is OK for
the first victim to do the same thing back, a notion that I,
geneally unsuccessfully, continually try to disabuse my kids of.
Kosovars are not innocent helpful
A number of people on the list of familiar with Paul Burkett's recent
book on Marx's understanding of nature. Earlier, I had written that
Marx had downplayed the importance of nature in his work because of the
political influence of Lassalle on the German working-class movement. I
suggested
- Original Message -
From: "Michael Perelman" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A number of people on the list of familiar with Paul Burkett's recent
book on Marx's understanding of nature. Earlier, I had written that
Marx had downplayed the importance of nature in his work
Nathan Newman wrote:
At the Marxism conference, I went to the Marx and Ecology panel where John
Bellamy Foster, Joel Kovel and Bertall Ollman discussed the issue. John
Foster made the rather strong claim that Marx actually has a deep,
well-detailed ecological component to his thought, but that
At 02:59 PM 9/25/00 -0400, you wrote:
Wasn't Marx himself critical of the notion that only labor creates
value? I recall something about nature being a partner in the
enterprise.
for Marx, labor and nature both create use-values, whereas only
labor creates value.
But use values have exchange
Kosovars are not innocent helpful victims.
Most *are*.
Serbs are not monsters of quasi-Nazi brutality.
Some *are*--and a lot of those who are work for the government...
Brad DeLong
--
Professor J. Bradford DeLong
Department of Economics, #3880
University of California at Berkeley
Berkeley,
Given the
pressures on it, the Milosevic government has been one of the mildest in
recent history. It is no more repressive than the FSLN in Nicaragua...
Why this compulsion to lie to blacken the reputation of the Sandinistas?
I had written:
I think that who is and who is not a "demon" depends on one's political
perspective.
Brad writes:
I think that who is and who is not a demon depends on who acts like a demon.
We clearly disagree.
As with so many things, we agree and we disagree.
Objectively, some people are
Doug Henwood wrote:
Nathan Newman wrote: [snip]
How did Joel Kovel react, if at all?
Neither Ollman nor Kovel reacted to this part of Foster's argument. More
interesting, actually, was Foster's point of departure: his general emphasis
on Marx's debt to Epicurus. While listening, I found
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/25/00 01:18PM
I suppose if others predict crisis every six months or so, and I never
predict one, eventually they'll be right and I'll be wrong. What's the
opposite of a broken clock that's right once a day? Maybe an electric
clock that keeps the right time until the
I should have mention Foster's book. It is excellent. Yes, he does make his
case convincingly, but not quite the way that Nathan expressed it. It was not
so much Stalin purging that part of Marx, but a general ignorance of the
materialist tradition in which Marx was working. John goes into
Brad, read the first two pages of Ricardo's _Principles_. A major mistake of the
economics profession was in developing the theory of value for commodities that
derive their value from scarcity, in other words, for exceptional cases, instead
of focusing on the general case, *reproducible
What Brad writes is perfectly consistent with Marx's labor theory of value [with
one exception], although numerous comentators pretend to have discovered some
glaring defect. The exception is that things can have exchange value even if they
are not scarce -- I will leave out all the asterisks.
At 14:27 25/09/00 -0700, you wrote:
snip
I often hear opponents of Marxist economics demanding some sort of proof
that labor is the source of all value. There is no proof. Marx was
trying to understand the way a particular form of social labor was
organized. Natural forces as well as natural
At 03:09 PM 9/25/00 -0700, you wrote:
Given the
pressures on it, the Milosevic government has been one of the mildest in
recent history. It is no more repressive than the FSLN in Nicaragua...
Why this compulsion to lie to blacken the reputation of the Sandinistas?
This is flame bait.
Louis
Doug Henwood wrote:
Wasn't Marx himself critical of the notion that only labor creates
value? I recall something about nature being a partner in the
enterprise.
Probably someone else has already responded to this more accurately
than I can -- I'm still struggling with nearly a thousand
Under simple commodity production (where there is neither wage-labor
nor surplus-value), the deviations between prices and values are
_accidental_ (a disequilibrium phenomenon).
They are not a disequilibrium phenomenon. Scarce resource-based
products *continue* to have prices in excess of
Of course, the cost of reproduction must be the least cost option. Oxygen
is a by product of growing plants. The technology Brad proposes is not
very cost-efficient.
If a reproducible commodity ain't scarce, it has no value. We can
make oxygen out of water and electricity, but no one
Brad, I think that there is some similarity between Hayek (Don't tell Justin)
and this part of Marx's theory. Hayek, you suggest, came to the right
conclusion without the labor theory of value. So what? I might propose a
biblical explanation for why a rock falls to the ground. Would that
Max Sawicky wrote:
What was remarkable -- and
what Ollman himself remarked on in some of the responses to his
presentation, was the reductivist view of class and class interests implicit
in many of the questions directed to him. Carrol
Interesting. Examples?
I have a terrible memory,
En relación a [PEN-L:2288] Re: Re: Re: The US buys democracy fo,
el 25 Sep 00, a las 21:22, Nestor Miguel Gorojovsky dijo:
What would they say if, for example, Pinochet lavishly funded a pro-
Russian party for the American elections? Or would they, in the end,
prefer to vote for "their
Didn't Marx argue that labor-power was the measure of exchange-value?
Andrew Austin
Green Bay, WI
If a reproducible commodity ain't scarce, it has no value. We can
make oxygen out of water and electricity, but no one would say that
the cost of air is determined by its cost of reproduction...
Brad DeLong
===
So math has no value?
Ian
From: "Nestor Miguel Gorojovsky" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date sent: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 22:27:30 -0300
Subject:[PEN-L:2294] A correction (was Re: Re: Re: The US buys
democracy for Yugoslavia.)
Priority:
In a message dated 9/25/00 4:11:17 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
CB: But "value" and "exchange-value" are not quite exactly the same thing
?
This has probably been answered, but no. Value is socially necessay abstract
labor time embodied in the commodity. Exchange
No, he did not. Although he did not elaborate on the reasons until the
3rd volume.
"Austin, Andrew" wrote:
Didn't Marx argue that labor-power was the measure of exchange-value?
Andrew Austin
Green Bay, WI
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
In an otherwise disgraceful, though widely cited, essay on the LTV, G.A,
Cohen distinsguishes usefully between the strict and vulgar LTVs. The vulgar
LTV is that labor is the source of all value. For Marx this is true by
definition; he makes a few sideswipes at subjective value theories, which
In a message dated 9/25/00 5:57:37 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Surely historical facts are not unimportant, when one discusses the
"judgment of history," no? In any case, what FAIR is trying to do,
of course, is not to fuel disputes over "who did what to whom
I wrote:
Under simple commodity production (where there is neither wage-labor nor
surplus-value), the deviations between prices and values are _accidental_
(a disequilibrium phenomenon).
Brad opines:
They are not a disequilibrium phenomenon. Scarce resource-based products
*continue* to have
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date sent: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 23:03:24 EDT
Subject:[PEN-L:2302] Re: Re: The US buys democracy for Yugoslavia.
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In a message dated 9/25/00
At 04:16 PM 09/25/2000 -0700, you wrote:
Sounds a lot like Hayek's vision of the business cycle. But Hayek managed
to do fine without the LToV. So what's its role in this Hayekian mechanism?
The Austrian edifice, including Hayek, is based on Marx and his immediate
followers (though they tried
I know that emotions run strong on this issue, but let's keep it cool.
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Seems to me that the KLA were terrorists before NATO discovered their
utility when Milisovec, the former great diplomat suddenly turned thug, did
not go along with NATO's ukase that he accede to their wishes. Then they
became allies and freedom-fighters.
Cheers, Ken Hanly
- Original Message
This is quite interesting. However, I thought that the autonomous status of
Kosovo was revoked because Kosovo refused to accept the structural
adjustment provisions attached to an IMF loan. By revoking autonomy Kosovo
was forced to accept the conditions. Those conditions also prohibited some
of
Is the concept of a "demon" a useful analytical category? It may be in some
societies but in advanced capitalist countries it surely should be
understood in relationship to psychological warfare designed to obscure
underlying realities rather than to reveal or analyse them. Isn't that true?
Eh!
I haven't touched on this matter in quite a while, but I recall in the
Results of the Immediate Process of Production Marx arguing that
exchange-value acquires a form independent of its use-value as the pure form
of materialized social labor-time. Moreover, in Capital I, doesn't he
distinguish
Ignoring the typos, it seems to me that you claim both that Marx is not
interested in notions of entitlement and that insofar as Marxism has an
ethical basis it is that communism will give workers that to which they are
entitled. So even though Marx has no interest in entitlement the ethical
I have no idea how accurate this is but perhaps it as of interest and
relevant to the recent thread. Things do not look good for the West or
Milosevic, although perhaps he could have a comfortable retirement as long
as he stays in Serbia.
CHeers, Ken Hanly
Stratfor.com's Weekly Global
"Human Resources" has the distinction of being not only one of the finest
movies ever made about the labor movement, it is also unparalleled in its
ability to explain and make concrete issues that barely receive attention
in the print media, such as "just-in-time" production techniques.
College
77 matches
Mail list logo
