Re Rakesh's [5712]: > Is it funny to ridicule someone who thinks Marx > got basically right? All those who reject _all_ authority figures should agree that no one should be immune from being the 'target' of humorous remarks. (In this sense, I think there is something profoundly anti- authoritarian about "Monty Python's Flying Circus" and "Saturday Night Live".) This doesn't mean, though, that _anything_ -- including racist and sexist remarks -- should be considered to be 'funny' ... but that has never been an issue on this list. > Why is that funny when we have had to pay--for > example, we marxists > don't have mentors at many of the top schools, > certainly not mentors > who could help us get jobs (take for example > Harvard, Princeton and > Stanford--Duncan left here years ago). This has, imo, very little -- if anything -- to do with critiques of Marx that charge logical inconsistency. Indeed, _all_ heterodox economists have a similar problem (in all but a few select schools.) I.e. _anyone_ who adheres to a perspective that is not marginalist is considered to be an 'outsider'. Even _for marginalists_, they might have problems getting jobs if they specialize in certain 'arcane' areas -- especially history of economic thought, economic history, or economic philosophy. > I guess it's funny that we > seem as ridiculous as legless black knights, Yes, I thought that funny. > but if scientific > criticism were allowed in political economy, i > think these marx critics could easily be proven > to be weak and defenseless. they > criticize and ridicule from within the protected > confines of the bourgeois academy. So 'scientific criticism' is not allowed in political economy? There are certainly a bunch of journals, and radical publishing houses, that might be willing to publish such 'scientific criticism' though. Thus, it _is_ allowed (in at least some forums) ... if one actually has 'scientific criticism'. \. > it didn't lead to much in the engagements with > Freeman on this list. So Steve is to blame if Alan doesn't want to, or have time to, engage him in a discussion on non-linear dynamics, etc.? > Wait! Mongiovi wrote a long critique of TSS > which in many ways came > down to the methodology of comparative statics. > He is trying to bury a rival school; I think he > should defend his critique openly in > debate with Kliman, Freeman, Ernst or others. He _did_ defend his critique openly (and the fur was flying! ... although Gary remained calm throughout) at the IWGVT this Spring. As for OPE-L, no one from a TSS perspective has yet challenged him on that critique on-list ... even though (of course!) that is their right. In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Jul 15 2001 - 10:56:27 EDT