In a message dated 3/5/2002 6:14:29 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dear Melvin, before becoming a researcher, I was a worker and an Union
leader, like you. And I believed in "historical materialism", too. I
believed in it, because having not yet visited history by myself, I t
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 5:23 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:23465] Re: Re: Suppression of Marx
___
Dear Melvin, before becoming a researcher, I was a worker and an Union
leader, like you. And
> CB: In Engels' day, and in Lenin's, even if there was a global limit ,
there was no need to wait for that limit to have the world revolution.
Today, we may not even approach the limit really.
>
First, there is no "global limit" in "marxist-leninist" theory because,
according to it, endogenous
As for her, Rosa Luxemburg, although she hoped and prayed for the
"proletarian revolution", had understood that the accumulation could not be
endogenous and on the contrary needed an expansion within space, what was
attested by colonialism. She logically concluded that this expansionism was
necess
t: Monday, March 04, 2002 10:22 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PEN-L:23464] Re: RE: Suppression of Marx
Was Sraffa a Sraffian/neo-Ricardian; did he ever go beyond critiquing
neo-classical garbage?
>
>Anyway, it was Justin who said that Roemer "probably caused more people to
>take a look at Marx" or something like that. I don't know if that
>encouraged
>people to read Marx with intelligence.
Wasn't me, but I think it's true. As far as his effect on economists, I
can't say. He made _me_ r
>Was Sraffa a Sraffian/neo-Ricardian; did he ever go beyond critiquing
>neo-classical garbage?
>
No we wasn't one, and no he didn't. Personally, I have some reason to think
he was a Stalinist. When I was at Cambs I was friends with a grad student of
his who said that in his rooms he had Stali
n't persist.
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
> -Original Message-
> From: Michael Perelman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 8:22 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [PEN-L:23464] Re: RE: Suppression of Marx
Michael Perelman
> I don't agree with Romer [Roemer], but as Jim D.? observed, he probably
caused
> more people to take a look at Marx. If some of these people read Marx
> with intelligence, so much the better.
it's important to be careful with spelling here, since there are at least
two economi
Please, to all concerned, try not to make this personal.
Drewk wrote:
>
> In his latest attack on me, Justin Schwartz leaves out and does
> not respond to the following (I wrote it in response to him
> yesterday):
I think that the use of the term, suppression, is a problem. I don&
In a message dated 3/4/2002 7:17:33 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
MARX AND HIS POSTERITY
Admittedly the founder of what has been the working-class movement shares
some responsibility in the confusion of the thought that is meant to be
Marxist or Marxism-related. But he did
Was Sraffa a Sraffian/neo-Ricardian; did he ever go beyond critiquing
neo-classical garbage?
On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 10:07:16AM -0600, Forstater, Mathew wrote:
> There is a difference between making an unconvincing argument of logical
> inconsistency and claiming a logical inconsistency without a
.>
>There is a difference between making an unconvincing argument of logical
>inconsistency and claiming a logical inconsistency without any attempt
>to demonstrate it. (By the way, I never understood the Sraffian
>argument against the LTV as in general based on logical inconsistency--I
>thought
There is a difference between making an unconvincing argument of logical
inconsistency and claiming a logical inconsistency without any attempt
to demonstrate it. (By the way, I never understood the Sraffian
argument against the LTV as in general based on logical inconsistency--I
thought it was t
MARX AND HIS POSTERITY
Admittedly the founder of what has been the working-class movement shares
some responsibility in the confusion of the thought that is meant to be
Marxist or Marxism-related. But he did not deserve to get zealots completely
lacking of critical judgment as heirs. Marx experie
I hope soon to respond more fully to Mat Forstater, Jim Devine,
and Justin Schwartz. Now there's no time.
So for now, let me just try to refocus attention on the central
reason why I say there's suppression of Marx by the Marxist and
Sraffian economists. Everyone else in the discus
Suppression of Marx
by Drewk
26 February 2002 13:51 UTC
Hi Charles,
I'm not sure which article of Michael Perelman's you are referring
to. But he's on this list, of course, so perhaps the best way to
clarify matters is for Michael to indicate whether there's
anyth
al Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Charles Brown
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 3:40 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PEN-L:23215] Suppression of Marx
Suppression of Marx
by Drewk
24 February 2002 20:51 UTC
This is a reply to Charles Brown's
Suppression of Marx
by Drewk
24 February 2002 20:51 UTC
This is a reply to Charles Brown's pen-l 22901. (I hope to
respond to Tom Walker's question in pen-l 22893 soon.)
Andrew,
Thanks for taking the time to give that summary of your thinking.
I want to note that I got the t
Dear Melvin P.,
Could you go slower, please, and fill in the gaps for me? I don't
understand your references. Could you give examples?
I did get the point about Southern cotton production being
(capitalist) commodity production, even though Black slaves, not
"free" workers, produced the cotton
In a message dated Sun, 24 Feb 2002 3:44:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, "Drewk"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This is a reply to Charles Brown's pen-l 22901. (I hope to
> respond to Tom Walker's question in pen-l 22893 soon.)
>
> Charles asked me
>
> "Is it your position that the 'transformati
This is a reply to Charles Brown's pen-l 22901. (I hope to
respond to Tom Walker's question in pen-l 22893 soon.)
Charles asked me
"Is it your position that the 'transformation problem' is a bit of
a misnomer, because Marx's point was that prices deviating
unsystematically from value is what ca
>Rakesh Bhandari wrote:
>
>>Why is that when the question of oil economics came up, I seemed to
>>be the only one who remembered Bina's work though Bina had been a
>>co-editor (I believe) of RRPE with many of you?
>
>Hey, I had Bina on the radio. You're not the only one.
>
>Doug
Doug, this was
> Cyrus [Bina] is supposed to be on pen-l. I do remember him very well from
my
> days on the ed. board.
he's a good guy, too.
Jim Devine
Cyrus is supposed to be on pen-l. I do remember him very well from my
days on the ed. board.
Doug Henwood wrote:
> Rakesh Bhandari wrote:
>
> >Why is that when the question of oil economics came up, I seemed to
> >be the only one who remembered Bina's work though Bina had been a
> >co-editor (I
Rakesh Bhandari wrote:
>Have you ever explained why Henwood was never able to get himself
>both to understand why most third world trade unionists oppose the
>linkage between trade and labor rights and to recognize that to many
>the US union backed anti sweatshop movements is probably a move i
Rakesh Bhandari wrote:
>Why is that when the question of oil economics came up, I seemed to
>be the only one who remembered Bina's work though Bina had been a
>co-editor (I believe) of RRPE with many of you?
Hey, I had Bina on the radio. You're not the only one.
Doug
embered Bina's work though Bina had been a
>> co-editor (I believe) of RRPE with many of you?
>>
>> I mean how ethnocentric and racist are the RRPE editors?
>>
>> The American left is not a pretty thing from where I look.
>>
>> Fight imperialism
entric and racist are the RRPE editors?
>
> The American left is not a pretty thing from where I look.
>
> Fight imperialism, fight racism.
>
>
> Rakesh
>
>
> >STOP THIS RIGHT NOW.
> >
> >On Sun, Feb 17, 2002 at 10:23:44AM -0800, Rakesh Bhandari wrote
now switched his thesis from "RRPE did not put a ban on
>> Kliman because of his politics" to "a RRPE ban does not constitute
>> suppression because Kliman was free to publish elsewhere." Not very
>> fast footed work. Devine continues to imply that much should not be
STOP THIS RIGHT NOW.
On Sun, Feb 17, 2002 at 10:23:44AM -0800, Rakesh Bhandari wrote:
> Eric has now switched his thesis from "RRPE did not put a ban on
> Kliman because of his politics" to "a RRPE ban does not constitute
> suppression because Kliman was free to publ
Eric has now switched his thesis from "RRPE did not put a ban on
Kliman because of his politics" to "a RRPE ban does not constitute
suppression because Kliman was free to publish elsewhere." Not very
fast footed work. Devine continues to imply that much should not
event or prohibit the publication of "
>
> I don't think this definition supports your claims.
>
> Did RRPE "prevent or prohibit" anyone to publish a paper. No. RRPE declines to
> publish many papers, but this is not suppression. There are many other
>
heck, I know places where it's an _honor_ to have the RRPE reject one's
publications. -- J. Devine
-Original Message-
From: John Ernst
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 2/16/02 10:25 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:22924] Suppression
Eric Nilsson [PEN-L:22916] challenges Andrew Kliman to produc
event or prohibit" anyone to publish a paper. No. RRPE declines to
publish many papers, but this is not suppression. There are many other
publishing outlets: RRPE has never tried to stop anyone from publishing a
paper in a different journal as far as I know. Even if RRPE decided never to
Seriously, Let's drop this. I am logging off now. Good night.
On Sun, Feb 17, 2002 at 01:25:24AM -0500, John Ernst wrote:
> Eric Nilsson [PEN-L:22916] challenges Andrew Kliman to produce
> evidence of suppression at the hands of URPE/RRPE. Webster's New
> Universal Un
Eric Nilsson [PEN-L:22916] challenges Andrew Kliman to produce
evidence of suppression at the hands of URPE/RRPE. Webster's New
Universal Unabridged Dictionary, 2nd edition, gives the following
definition of "suppress":
"3. to prevent or prohibit the publication of
the paradigm of capital could be
shattered. For this reason, the possibility of workers experiencing a
sense of emancipation through a reduction of working hours has been
politically suppressed."
I have said as much many times myself. I also happen to have documented
key episodes in the histo
tival, which was declared illegal under the "National Security
Law." The authorities arrested more than 7,000 students.Since
that time the south Korean government has engaged in total
suppression of anyone even mentioning the word "unification." All
patriotic organizations have bee
The Kangnung area of south Korea has been in complete turmoil since
the discovery of a crippled submarine from the DPRK. This is a
classic example of an "incident" being blown out of proportion and
used to promote war hysteria and divert the people. The south
Korean fascist government flooded the
South Korean newspapers are writing these days of an atmosphere of
great unease and distrust on the university campuses and colleges.
This is in the wake of the violent suppression of the student
reunification festival in August that resulted in hundreds of
students being injured and over 7,000
41 matches
Mail list logo
