Joanna wrote:
> No I don't think the siphoning is done. They've
> got a ways to go ripping off the middle/professional
> class: end tenure, break remaining unions,
> further privatize schools, Social Security, etc.
I believe I was being selfish again and thinking about home.
There is very little
At 02:32 PM 11/24/2002 -0800, you wrote:
The reason why I think the Republican coup of 2000 may be a
historical turning point for the capital accumulation process
(from speculation back to production) is that finance capital
siphoned much of what could have been siphoned from the rest of
the world
Joanna wrote:
> Sabri wrote:
>> "but maybe we can explain this shift of capital
>> from production to speculation using a more comprehensive
>> theory, which does not exclude advanced robotics."
>
> From my reading of Marx, I seem to remember that the
> shift from productive to speculative capital
At 09:17 PM 11/22/2002 -0800, Sabri wrote:
"but maybe we can explain this shift of capital from
production to speculation using a more comprehensive theory,
which does not exclude advanced robotics."
From my reading of Marx, I seem to remember that the shift from productive
to speculative capita
In a message dated 11/22/02 11:54:55 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Not that I disagree with that evolution of speculative capital
contains a life of its own, that is, it is own laws, but I am not
sure if we really can write down what exactly those laws are. Who
knows! Maybe,
Several excerpts:
> That is to say we are passing from an industrial formation
> to something new that has not yet taken shape.
> Is this not proof positive we are in transition: we don't
> know how to say what we want to say because transition by
> definition is instability of perceived form.
>
Melvin:
> Speculative capital evolves on the basis of the mode
> of accumulation, which contains a life of its own and
> its distinct law system.
I don't really know who Albert Cohen is. Must be some philosopher
or writer of some sort. But I read an article by him about 25
years ago in some obscu
In a message dated 11/22/02 10:09:06 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I said:
>I don't mean to say that we are not experiencing
>an evolutionary leap in the mode of production,
>because I personally don't have sufficient data
>to conclude either way, but maybe we can explain
>
In a message dated 11/22/02 9:21:11 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There is no doubt that automation and, at least for the past 30
years or so, computerization have been on going transformations
in the current mode of production but there had been other
periods in the past in
I said:
> I don't mean to say that we are not experiencing
> an evolutionary leap in the mode of production,
> because I personally don't have sufficient data
> to conclude either way, but maybe we can explain
> this shift of capital from production to speculation
> using a more comprehensive theo
Excerpt I (from part 1):
> Now, the first stage of communism is only possible after - not
> before, the evolutionary leap in the mode of production is
> underway. This evolutionary leap does not mean the evolutionary
> leap from agriculture to industry, but rather the leap -
transition,
> from ind
Part 3 of 3
If Stalin would have done this, that or the other: if this leader would have done it "my way": if there was more democracy; if Stalin was not a monster; if this or that agreement was not made, etc. Fine, I will not object to this. Stalin was irrational on this and that policy and such
12 matches
Mail list logo
