I think Paul Bl intended the following for the list./Jerry ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "paul bullock" <paulbullock@ebms-ltd.in2home.co.uk> Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2000 22:21:12 -0000 Subject: Re: [OPE-L:4602] Re: reflections on prior publications Dear Jerry, Serves you right for trying to get me to speak. Marx did doubt , but clearly not his own achievements. (after all he had finished with, ie dealt with all the key questions,, as he said, 'all that shit' as he got to the end of his life and turned to working on Asian/Turkish material ) I'm orthodox because he convinces me, however much I pore over the stuff.... it coincides with my experience.. As for the methodologies of Grossman and Mattick, no note is better than a short one for the moment, I suppose you mean their understanding of Marx's ? 30,000 words is not so short an article. all the best Paul BL. -----Original Message----- From: glevy@pratt.edu <glevy@pratt.edu> To: ope-l@galaxy.csuchico.edu <ope-l@galaxy.csuchico.edu> Date: 04 December 2000 16:46 Subject: [OPE-L:4602] Re: reflections on prior publications >Re [OPE-L:4595]: > >Thanks for your reply to my questions, Paul (Bullock). > >> The two articles in the BCSE on Productive Labour, to which I > > >> As you know, in the same copy of that journal David Yaffe and I >> tackled the >> question of the Post War Boom and Inflation, in which the financial issues >> in particular were tackled in a way which, I would say, has not been >> bettered. <snip> > >That's a pretty strong claim for what you admit is a brief article. >As for the post-war boom, have you read Webber & Rigby _The Golden Age Illusion_? If so, what do you think of it? > >> I remain a 'fundamentalist' or >> 'orthodox' Marxist, > >I've never understood the attraction of some Marxists to fundamentalism and orthodoxy. It seems to me, btw, to run counter to Marx's own slogan that one should (translating from Latin) "doubt everything". > > >viewing Mattick, Grossman, Rosdolsky as key -- >> although I must stress that I had read NONE of them until after RC3/4, and >> Grossman only when available in the truncated form in English quite >> recently! (Could someone please translate the whole book!) I judge > them by >> what Marx and Engels wrote. > >Do you think that the methodology of Grossmann (see the book that you cite) was the same as that employed by Mattick? Do you agree with him on the role of "successive approximations" in Marxist theory? > >I certainly agree that a non-abridged translation of Grossmann's book is needed. > >In solidarity, Jerry > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 31 2000 - 00:00:04 EST