(OPE-L) The End of History

From: glevy@PRATT.EDU
Date: Wed Dec 03 2003 - 08:14:37 EST

• Next message: Riccardo Bellofiore: "Re: (OPE-L) Re: Which label: neo-Ricardian, surplus approach, or linear production theory?"
• Previous message: glevy@PRATT.EDU: "(OPE-L) Re: Which label: neo-Ricardian, surplus approach, or linear production theory?"
• In reply to: Rakesh Bhandari: "Re: (OPE-L) Re: Which label: neo-Ricardian, surplus approach, or linear production theory?"
• Next in thread: glevy@PRATT.EDU: "(OPE-L) Re: Which label: neo-Ricardian, surplus approach, or linear production theory?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Rakesh wrote:

> In a
> Marxist sense, do not these theorists accept the end of history?

Did Marx accept "the end of history"?  It is true that he claimed once
that communism would represent an end to the "pre-history" of our
species.  This is quite different, however, that history itself
would end.

What would "the end of history" mean?  If the subject of history --
our species -- ends then _that_ would represent the end of history.
Nuclear or environmental catastrophe might then by the catalyst
for the actual ending of history.

In solidarity, Jerry

• Next message: Riccardo Bellofiore: "Re: (OPE-L) Re: Which label: neo-Ricardian, surplus approach, or linear production theory?"
• Previous message: glevy@PRATT.EDU: "(OPE-L) Re: Which label: neo-Ricardian, surplus approach, or linear production theory?"
• In reply to: Rakesh Bhandari: "Re: (OPE-L) Re: Which label: neo-Ricardian, surplus approach, or linear production theory?"
• Next in thread: glevy@PRATT.EDU: "(OPE-L) Re: Which label: neo-Ricardian, surplus approach, or linear production theory?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Dec 04 2003 - 00:00:00 EST