[OPE-L:6578] From Andrew Kliman

From: Alejandro Ramos (aramos@btl.net)
Date: Wed Feb 13 2002 - 14:12:25 EST


I'm forwarding this I received from Andrew Kliman.

A.

-------------------------------
From: "Drewk" <Andrew_Kliman@msn.com>
To: <akliman@pace.edu>
Subject: Dear Supporters
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 23:01:40 -0500

Please Circulate Widely
-----------------------

A VICTORY FOR PLURALISM!

February 12, 2002
Dear Supporters of Pluralism,

We were completely outmatched in terms of money and power, but we
have won a tremendous victory!  This is a time for celebration.
It is also a time to capitalize on our victory by intensifying the
struggle for pluralism, especially pluralism *within* radical
economics.

We faced a far richer and more powerful adversary, the Union for
Radical Political Economics (URPE).  But what proved to be more
important than money and power is what *we* had –– the knowledge
that our cause is just, and the determination to fight for it to
the end, without regard for the consequences.  As a result, a
charge of professional misconduct that jeopardized my ability to
earn a living no longer hangs over my head, and we have broken the
publishing ban imposed on me by URPE’s journal.  (For those not
yet aware of the specifics, I have appended below part of a recent
message by Alan Freeman.  Please note that the URPE statement also
appears in the latest “URPE Newsletter,” Winter 2002, p. 3.)

I wish to extend my deepest thanks to all of you who stood by me
during that frightening and miserable time when my ability to work
and my reputation were threatened.  Your advice was of inestimable
value.  Even more important was your plain human support.  It kept
my spirits up time and time again, helping me to bear up under the
suffering.  This victory truly could not have been won without
you.

Yet it is not only a personal victory.  It is a victory for all of
us.  Editorial boards that would want to act as censorship boards
will now have to think twice before banning or otherwise
mistreating authors with whom they disagree.  Schools of thought
that would rather launch ad hominem attacks on opponents than
engage in open theoretical debate will have to think twice.
Professional associations that would sacrifice all principles and
ostracize their internal critics for the sake of institutional
survival will have to think twice.  The more widely we spread the
word about the victory we have *all* won, the more widespread will
be the benefits we *all* reap.

There is also another sense in which it is important to spread the
word.  We have won a victory in part because, instead of just
complaining privately about violations of the norms of pluralism,
we were willing to “go public,” to expose them openly.  It is time
to intensify such efforts.

I sense in URPE’s statement the beginning of a more cooperative
attitude, which I eagerly welcome.  I pledge my complete and
unstinting cooperation to all members of URPE who wish to help us
right the wrongs that have been done and repudiate the parties
responsible for them.  Let us together ensure that URPE no longer
functions as a union against other people’s radical economics
(AESA, IWGVT, post-Keynesians, etc.).

Andrew Kliman

--------------------

From: Alan Freeman [mailto:a.freeman@greenwich.ac.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 9:36 PM
To: carchedi@fee.uva.nl
Subject: Obstacle to pluralism removed


Dear Friend

…  I am now writing on a happier note to inform you that URPE has
retracted the false charge it made against [Dr] Andrew [Kliman]
and has lifted the publishing ban imposed on him.

RRPE and its agents falsely charged that Andrew violated
professional ethics by submitting a paper to another journal while
it was still under review at the RRPE, and banned all further
articles authored by him. In its retraction, which I reproduce
below, URPE accepts that the paper was no longer under review when
Andrew submitted it elsewhere.

Although the fundamental underlying issue of pluralism remains
unresolved, since Andrew's paper was never reviewed again and the
appeal he requested was never granted, nevertheless the retraction
removes a decisive obstacle to genuine scholarly debate around
this substantive question.

This must now develop on the basis of a recognition of the
legitimate contribution and right to be heard of all principal
schools of thought, unfettered by any restrictions or charges
concerning persons which in any way restrict the access of the
reading public to the ideas that they hold.

Below is the text of URPE's retraction which is published on its
website at
(http://www.urpe.org/rrpehome.html)

STATEMENT BY URPE STEERING COMMITTEE, HAZEL DAYTON GUNN, MANAGING
EDITOR OF RRPE, THE EDITORIAL BOARD OF RRPE:

Dr. Andrew Kliman believed that Hazel Dayton Gunn disseminated a
claim that he had violated professional ethics by publishing an
article in another journal while it was still under review by the
RRPE.  WE WISH TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WHEN HE SUBMITTED A REVISED
VERSION OF THE ARTICLE IN QUESTION TO ANOTHER JOURNAL, THE
MANUSCRIPT HAD ALREADY BEEN REJECTED BY RRPE.  However, a
misunderstanding arose after Dr. Kliman requested an appeal of the
original rejection.  The matter has now been settled and THE
EDITORIAL BOARD HAS REMOVED THE SANCTION DENYING DR. KLIMAN THE
RIGHT TO SUBMIT ARTICLES TO RRPE FOR PUBLICATION.  There was no
intention to inflict harm on Dr. Kliman.  [emphases added]



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Mar 02 2002 - 00:00:04 EST