>Don't come back with how what we have is better than what they had in the
>USSR. With the exception of Charles, no one here advocates that.
>
>--jks
Actually, what the Russian people had in the USSR is better than what they
have now. Furthermore, the US had it better because it ripped off coun
Justin wrote:
> I have argued that market socialism would do better on every one of
> these dimensions; Dave Schweickart makes the case in his Against
> Capitalism. The planning socialists who predominate in this list have
> their own arguments, which you can get from them.
has anyone done a
It's very marxist to be rejected as a marxist.
I've started reading Capital. V1. I found an
old bookmark in my copy -- a pay stub from 1972.
mbs
. . . I include Dennis in Marxism, but if I followed his principles of
metaphysical purity I would write, "I hope you realize that
Dennis has noth
>
> Strictly speaking the socialists drew upon Rousseau's notion of
> "perfectabilité," (which the translator, Roger D. Masters, says
> means "the
> capacity to make progress" in J-J Rousseau, THE SOCIAL CONTRACT AND
> DISCOURSE ON THE ORIGIN OF INEQUALITY, Lester Crocker, ed. Washington
> Square
>
>I appreciate your antagonism to the Austrian school. I'll get out my silver
>bullets and my stake. The cult of H*yek & Mises (which I guess is backed up
>by the There Is No Alternative political movement of Thatcher and Reagan)!!
>Recently I had a discussion with a follower of H*yek who e
Jim Devine wrote:
> Colin writes:
> >1. Marx had a great many ideas about Capitalism and social science in
> >general, and much can be used even if you don't buy the notion that
> >capitalism blows up of its own accord (I don't).
>
> nor did Marx.
I agree with this substantially, but there are
At 09:11 AM 12/18/00 -0800, Jim Devine wrote, responding to me:
>At 07:01 AM 12/18/00 -0500, you wrote:
>>I'm basically a plain old Bill Clinton Democrat,
>
>I won't ask about the Lincoln Bedroom.
>;-)
>
Probably a good idea. I hear the ghost of old Abe has been known to haunt it : )
Tha
>
>Justin wrote:
>> I have argued that market socialism would do better on every one of
>>these dimensions; Dave Schweickart makes the case in his Against
>>Capitalism. The planning socialists who predominate in this list have
>>their own arguments, which you can get from them.
>
>has anyone do
Ian wrote:
>Just because Kant and his groupies called it the Enlightenment we 21st
>centurions have to blindly follow his historico-taxonomical rot? What
>Enlightenment? To paraphrase Snoopy, "acutally existing civilization is
>overrated"!
At least you knew what I was referring to, which was the
Carrol wrote:
>I think Marx's analysis of capitalism *does* imply that capitalism
>periodically self-destructs -- and I think the history of the last 150
>years bears that out empirically.
Much as I think that events like the Great Depression of the 1930s and the
Great Stagflation of the 1970s
Jeffrey Beatty wrote:
>Apropos of the latter, your comments express surprise at discovering that
>professional economists' notions of "natural" property rights are
>descendents of Locke's ideas about property rights. If you check out the
>early pages of the _Second Treatise of Government_, you
Justin:
>Is there any other person on this list who has espoused market economics?
>Doug is the only one of you who has evinced anything but utter, total,
>absolute, nauseated rejection,
Actually, as far as I can tell, there seems to be quite a gradation in what
people think:
1. Paleo-Marxists
I wrote:
>>in any event, the plan vs. market distinction is a false dichotomy... the
>>key issue is whether the people run the economy and the state in a
>>democratic way or not.
Justin writes:
>I'll buy that. Now, if I can get you to admit that in an economy where
>there are markets in producer
. . .
Is there any other person on this list who has espoused market economics?
Doug is the only one of you who has evinced anything but utter, total,
absolute, nauseated rejection,
Hey I'm still here.
mbs
> At least you knew what I was referring to, which was the point of
> using the
> term. I don't think it's worth spending a lot of energy arguing about the
> meanings of words, since they are usually pretty arbitrary and
> conventional.
>
> Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.ed
Is Barkley a socialist? Does Paul support market socialism, and not just
coops under capitalism? If so, I stand corrected. --jks
>From: Louis Proyect <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: [PEN-L:6223] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Questi
Can't make a point without sniping, can you? As if I have not argued it ad
nauseaum over the years, and recently, in fact, on this list, until Michael
Perlman shut me up for taking up too much bandwidth on the subject. But do
we really want to open this can of worms just now? Especially becaus
>Is there any other person on this list who has espoused market economics?
>Doug is the only one of you who has evinced anything but utter, total,
>absolute, nauseated rejection,
>
>
>Hey I'm still here.
Yeah, don't get so heated, Justin! Sure, I tried some opposing arguments,
but where would
Lisa & Ian Murray wrote:
> Does this mean we shouldn't quibble about the meaning[s] of democracy and
"The Enlightenment" and "democracy" pose radically different questions.
As Jim says, there really is no special argument over the reference of
the former; the question you raise is not over the
Play nice. Also, yes, I think that we have been through plan vs. market
already.
On Sat, Dec 16, 2000 at 02:40:17AM -, Justin Schwartz wrote:
>
> Can't make a point without sniping, can you? As if I have not argued it ad
> nauseaum over the years, and recently, in fact, on this list, until
>... As if I have not argued it ad nauseaum over the years, and recently,
>in fact, on this list, until Michael Perlman shut me up for taking up too
>much bandwidth on the subject. But do we really want to open this can of
>worms just now? Especially because we will see if markets vs. plans is
Oh, heavens, I took this back ages ago. --jks
>
>
> >Is there any other person on this list who has espoused market economics?
> >Doug is the only one of you who has evinced anything but utter, total,
> >absolute, nauseated rejection,
> >
> >
> >Hey I'm still here.
>
>Yeah, don't get so heated, J
22 matches
Mail list logo
