[ show plain text ]
Re Ajit's [OPE-L:3253]:
You seem to think that Paul Mattick Jr. is a Hegelian Marxist. He is
not. Indeed, in his controversial article in _Marx's Mathod in Capital_,
he complains at least twice about Marx's use of Hegelian "rhetoric".
One could indeed even claim that Paul's purpose in writing that article
was to attack the claim that Marx was a Hegelian. Also, as Rakesh's
comments on other threads make clear, he is no Hegelian Marxist
either.
Nonetheless, neither Paul M or Rakesh or Althusserians. It would
seem that hostility to Hegelian-Marxist interpretations comes from
many diverse theoretical perspectives. Of course, the flip side
of this is true as well in the sense that contrary perspectives
which might be broadly labeled as Hegelian-Marxist are diverse
as well.
In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 31 2000 - 00:00:10 EDT