[OPE-L:6344] Re: Re: recent science and society and Fred M's interpretation (fwd)

From: Alejandro Ramos (aramos@btl.net)
Date: Thu Jan 17 2002 - 10:18:19 EST

Re 6343:

>The focus that Roemer and Gil have on Marx seems
>to me to be secondary -- the main focus is on comprehending capitalism
>in a systematic manner.


do you *really* believe that capitalism can be "systematically" understood
building on general equilibrium theory and marginalism? General equilibrium
is, as its founding father himself proclaimed, a Platonic creature. How can
be this helpful to give us some light on the real, historical society we
live in?

I prefer to avoid any comment about whether or not such eclectic (or
oxymoronic?) research programs (Marx+Say+Walras+Jevons or
Pytagoras+Plato+Kant+Marx) can be considered "Marxist". Names are
unimportant and everybody is, of course, free to choose (or to loose!) any
name s/he likes.

>> the  Copernican world of John Roemer.
>As we saw last year, it is other Marxists -- some who are self-proclaimed
>advocates of  'Marx's Marxism'  -- who claim the title of being Copernicans.

I think all these "adjectives" cannot contribute to the dialogue. However,
I do remember Gil offering us his "Copernican" proposals in a no so distant


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Feb 02 2002 - 00:00:05 EST