Rakesh,
as Jerry can tell you, I have suggested several times that I'd like to
leave the list--and I have done so on two occasions--only to have him and
others implore me to put my oar back in again.
I also regard myself as a scholar on Marx, so regardless of what I think of
the scholarship of others--or they of mine--we share a common interest.
Similarly, as you probably know if you've read the relevant chapter from
Debunking, I make some very strong claims about the state of Marxian
scholarship there (though no stronger than I make many times more often
about neoclassical scholarship in the other relevant 12 chapters!). My
presence on this list (and its marxism predecessor) gave me the basis on
which to make those claims; I would have been talking through my hat to
allege that marxist economists were 'still trying to solve or avoid the
transformation problem' had I not observed the internet debates over the
last ten years.
I have also met some extremely good intellects with whom I agree through
this process--Chris Sciabarra, Ajit, Gil, etc.--and I also respect the
intellects of those with whom I disagree--Allin, Jerry, etc.
And in case you haven't noticed, normally I'm not fighting. I'm just
sitting on the banks of the river, watching the Black Knight attempt to
bite the passing traffic.
Steve
At 05:01 AM 6/1/01 Friday, you wrote:
> From Steve's 5698
>
>
> From my point of view, these arguments feel a bit like fighting the
>>Black Knight in "Monty Python and the Holy Grail". From my point of
>>view--and from the point of view of the historians of economic thought
>>who refereed my papers on this issue--I've already cut off both legs (the
>>belief that the LTV is Marx's fundamental theory of value, and the belief
>>that the LTV is consistent with his theory of value). Now VFT and TSS
>>interpretations are threatening to bite me to death. Sorry, but I'd
>>prefer to engage with other heterodox economists who don't share these hangups.
>
>I appreciate your presence here Steve, but if you would prefer to engage
>other hetero economists, why are you on this list? It would seem to me
>that you attach some importance to having your VFT, TSS and other so
>called orthodox Marxists opponents shown to be wrong. I have only once in
>my life attempted to show that the hare krishnas had misinterpreted the
>bhagvat gita (that is they had misinterpreted what was meant by always
>keeping krishna on your lips). But you do not seem to find your opponents
>to be beneath engagement; I am not subscribed to the hare krishna list serve.
>
>At any rate who is the bigger fool for continuing to fight? the black
>knight or his opponent. Obviously the latter, you have missed the real
>point of the Monty Python joke. So if you really think we value theoretic
>marxists are the black knight, wouldn't the joke be on you for drawing
>your sword on this list repeatedly?
>
>Rakesh
>
>
Home Page: http://www.debunking-economics.com
http://bus.uws.edu.au/steve-keen/
http://www.stevekeen.net
Dr. Steve Keen
Senior Lecturer
Economics & Finance
Campbelltown, Building 11 Room 30,
School of Economics and Finance
UNIVERSITY WESTERN SYDNEY
LOCKED BAG 1797
PENRITH SOUTH DC NSW 1797
Australia
s.keen@uws.edu.au 61 2 4620-3016 Fax 61 2 4626-6683
Home 02 9558-8018 Mobile 0409 716 088
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Jun 02 2001 - 00:00:09 EDT