Steve Diamond wrote:
>In any case, let's look at what Maurer himself says: since he thinks
>finance "discourse" is not understandable on its own terms -
>"Securitization, thus, is not obvious or self-evident" - he is here to tell
>us what is really going on - and THAT is the fundamental conceit b
> I wrote: >> isn't indicating "what is REALLY going on" the
"fundamental
> conceit" of Marx, too (in a non-deconstructionist way)? Marx would
look at
> something like securitization and say that common-sense
understandings are
> hardly enough, because in capitalism, the stream of interest inco
I wrote: >> isn't indicating "what is REALLY going on" the "fundamental
conceit" of Marx, too (in a non-deconstructionist way)? Marx would look at
something like securitization and say that common-sense understandings are
hardly enough, because in capitalism, the stream of interest income
corr
> [was: Re: [PEN-L:16153] Re: WB/IMF reconstructing capitalism yet
again - !!??]
>
> Steve Diamond wrote:
> >In any case, let's look at what Maurer himself says: since he
thinks
> >finance "discourse" is not understandable on its own terms -
> >"Securitization, thus, is not obvious or self-evi
[was: Re: [PEN-L:16153] Re: WB/IMF reconstructing capitalism yet again - !!??]
Steve Diamond wrote:
>In any case, let's look at what Maurer himself says: since he thinks
>finance "discourse" is not understandable on its own terms -
>"Securitization, thus, is not obvious or self-evident" - he is
