From: Jurriaan Bendien (adsl675281@tiscali.nl)
Date: Fri Feb 22 2008 - 17:53:37 EST
I did not say, Jerry, that "theory is but a matter of "pulling all the literature together" to tell a "sensible and comprehensive story". I said "Most of that Marxian analysis - the world market, the state etc. has already been done by various authors. It's just that nobody has pulled all the literature together yet in a really sensible and comprehensive story." Very few of the concepts in Marx's critique of political economy were original, as he himself admitted and documented with copious notes (as S.S. Prawer notes in "Marx and World Literature", Marx was one of the first writers on political economy to carefully acknowledge his sources). What was original was the synthesis he devised through a careful conspectus and critique of the existing literature and relevant historical facts. What Marxists believe, is that Marx was the only one allowed to do that. Out of that, you get a fixed doctrine, Marxism, which has all of the answers to all of the questions already, to which you have to win converts. Independent thinkers on the other hand think that new critiques and syntheses are necessary, assimilating both the new facts and the new theories (this is not really possible within Marxism, because it violates some or other principle of orthodoxy, or conflicts with literalness or the affirmation of faith). There are e.g. numerous authors who have attempted to understand the influence of the law of value, unequal exchange, and the accumulation of capital in a world market setting (e.g. Luxemburg, Trotsky, Bukharin, Varga, Grossman, Kohlmey, Busch, Siegel, Altvater, Neussus, Schoeller, Horvat, Emmanuel, Carchedi, Palloix, Rowthorn, Amin, Mandel, Castro, Shaikh, Köhler, Weeks, Kay, Husson, Itoh, Smith, Went, Giussani to name just a few). So it not exactly that there is a theoretical vacuum here. It simply not true that "all that has been written by Marxians on the subjects of the state, trade, and the world market has been merely suggestive or empirical". In retrospect, it is rather easy to mark out where they succeeded and where they failed. When the journal Prokla (Probleme des Klassenkampfs) was founded in West Germany in 1971, it indeed began explicitly with a discussion of the world market and monetary phenomena. As regards the theory of trade, there is a rich Marxian, semi-Marxian and anthropological theoretical literature on it as well. As regards the theory of the state, there is also a very large literature on it, both historical and theoretical, in many languages. If you concentrate on the theoretical foundations rather than being distracted by fashionable hot-air globalisation discourses in academia, it is quite possible to write a good dissertation on it. Had my life gone differently, I would have done so already. You could learn about the world market in different ways - read books, talk to people who know a lot about it, visit countries etc. But in the end you have to theorize for yourself, that was what I was talking about. Jurriaan _______________________________________________ ope mailing list ope@lists.csuchico.edu https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Feb 29 2008 - 00:00:03 EST