From: paul cockshott (clyder@GN.APC.ORG)
Date: Mon Dec 08 2003 - 05:17:22 EST
surely the issue is not whether a theory is social democratic
but whether its predictions are true.
_____
From: OPE-L [mailto:OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU] On Behalf Of michael a. lebowitz
Sent: 07 December 2003 20:00
To: OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU
Subject: Re: what makes a theory 'social democratic'?
At 11:42 05/12/2003 -0800, Rakesh wrote:
My real question is--- what kind of theory does imply that such an
arrangement would work? Or, alternatively stated, specifically what are the
necessary conditions/elements in a theory for it not to be social
democratic?
in solidarity,
michael
My answer, Michael:
A theory whose diagnosis of crisis either gives confidence that it will be
self-correcting or that the state can correct it with interventions that
remain with the structural parameters of the system, so to speak. See for
example Mattick Economic Crisis and Crisis Theory. I noticed that there is
even a web edition now available.
Yours, Rakesh
Hi Rakesh,
My question was not directly specifically at you--- as opposed to an
attempt to open up a general discussion that I've tried to stimulate in
various ways. Your answer was not one that I anticipated. Are you saying (a)
that one designates a theory as social-democratic according to its crisis
theory and (b) that a theory is social democratic that says economic crises
are not permanent and contain within them (via the destruction of capital)
self-correcting mechanisms?
in solidarity,
michael
---------------------
Michael A. Lebowitz
Professor Emeritus
Economics Department
Simon Fraser University
Burnaby, B.C., Canada V5A 1S6
Office Fax: (604) 291-5944
Home: Phone (604) 689-9510
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 00:00:01 EST