From: glevy@PRATT.EDU
Date: Wed Apr 25 2007 - 15:11:20 EDT
> Jerry I don't know why you bother with this. If Kliman wants to play > anti-Christ, let him then, who cares (as long as he doesn't get in the > way). Hi Jurriaan: He can play "the antichrist" (and/or "v = 0") if he wants to, but people should be informed that is his new persona. As for whether I should continue to "bother with this", I have often asked myself the same question! I *want* to ignore him but then he does something that just can't be ignored. <http://www.amazon.com/Reclaiming-Marxs-Capital-Inconsistency-Dunayevskaya/dp/0739118528/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-7333839-4569439?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1177515545&sr=1-1 Do you know this reviewer? The excerpt you reproduced was good, but his claims about what Kliman "denmonstrates irrefutably" and that "the TSSI interpretation (sic) is most certainly correct" are hogwash and uncritical hyperbole, imo. I think Fred has demonstrated irrefutably that the Kliman-McGlone perspective on the transformation is *in reality* an attempted *correction* of Marx. Corrections are OK, of course, when they are needed. But, let's call a horse a horse and a correction a correction. > But what is bad is that Kliman starts to hack into the article > about David Laibman, Yes, that was *very* bad! Kliman should have apologized for that, but that's not his modus opperandi. In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 30 2007 - 00:00:17 EDT