[OPE-L:6717] Re: Re: Re: *Internal Discussion Document*

From: Steve Keen (s.keen@uws.edu.au)
Date: Mon Mar 11 2002 - 15:16:15 EST

This is a first worth acknowledging: I agree very much with Rakesh's 
comments on this issue--including the value of Allin's contributions.

If I can add one observation,an elaboration of my perhaps obscure reference 
to "The Life of Brian".

It seems to be a law of human nature that people who hold a firm belief 
fight more with those who hold the same belief than they do against those 
who hold opposing beliefs; and this is especially true of the left. I would 
ask list members on both sides of this recent conflict to transcend this 
tendency and accept each other as members of the left rather than as "the 

I know doing this is not easy, but it is better than letting the discussion 
of Marx fragment once more.

At 06:01 AM 12/03/2002 Tuesday, you wrote:
>I am very sorry to see Alan go--now that Alan and Duncan are gone, OPE has 
>lost two of its most brilliant truly Marxian contributors whose early 
>exchanges were as stimulating as anything I have ever read in Marxism 
>cyber space. Gil is also exceptionally stimulating but his loss does not 
>damage the project of the development of Marxian political economy (and 
>one still gets to rid Gil at pen-l). Alan's and Duncan's departures do.
>Friendly relations had broken down; Alan wanted to organize the 
>destruction of the list and Jerry did not then honor Alan's wish that his 
>internal document in which said intention was explicitly stated remain 
>unseen by the rest of us.
>Paul Z writes:
>>1) When you received the mis-sent email, you had the option of using the
>>'delete' key.  You didn't.  You didn't post it either.  Rather, you
>>offered us 'bait' to ask you for it.  I did NOT ask and will not ask as I
>>don't like this kind of thing.  Nevertheless, was the original email
>>sender told TO WHOM you have forwarded the mis-sent email (or is he or she
>>to be left forever in the dark as to whom in the world has received the
>>mis-sending and who hasn't)?
>Alan did discourage Jerry from circulating this internal discussion 
>document in part because he thought it may be prejudical to the intended 
>recepients, but did in no uncertain terms tell Jerry that it was his 
>decision as to whether to circulate it. It was clear however that Alan 
>would have preferred that Jerry did not post it to the list. I know this 
>because Jerry forwarded his offlist discussion with Alan to Allin and me.
>Alan wanted to organize a boycott for the list, it seems to me, because 
>Jerry would not accept Andrew K's demand that Jerry apologize to Andrew 
>for having breached his security. Jerry said that he would accept Andrew 
>back on the list-- as Jerry first and I later recommended--if a. Andrew 
>simply asked Jerry and b.Andrew told Jerry privately that he Andrew agrees 
>to the list rules as long as other list members are so bound.
>I had been one of the OPE members who thought that Andrew should have to 
>apologize for his better watch your step comment or simply for any 
>misunderstanding that had resulted from it. But Jerry did not care about 
>this, so I saw no reason why I should.
>Alan agreed that this was a reasonable compromise for it seemed to involve 
>no loss of face for anyone.  Jerry told Alan to have Andrew carry out.
>For reasons I do not understand, discussion broke down. Alan suggested 
>that Andrew had already carried it out, but Andrew seemed to me to be 
>asking for an apology from Jerry while Jerry was not asking for an apology 
>from Andrew.
>It seems obvious that Alan wanted to organize a boycott of the list by the 
>TSS school and Jerry thought the list should know. Alan's boycott threat 
>was not friendly , and Jerry's circulation of a note that Alan would have 
>preferred remained private was not friendly.
>I suppose that Alan will take my discussion of this on list as unfriendly, 
>but I have nothing but admiration for Alan as well as John E and Paolo. I 
>have learned a great deal from Andrew and have said so on the internet and 
>even in published form. I do not understand why he did not take the 
>compromise that Jerry, Alan and I allthought was reasonable?
>>2) Do you agree with Alan's request that this whole thread be kept off the
>>list's archives ("I request the archive coordinator to remove all
>>references to this correspondence from the archives...")?  If not, why
>>Paul Z.
>>P.S.  Please do NOT send me that mis-sent email in any type of reply.
>>Paul Zarembka, editor, RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY at
>>********************** http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka
>Home Page: http://www.debunking-economics.com
>             http://bus.uws.edu.au/steve-keen/
>             http://www.stevekeen.net
>Dr. Steve Keen
>Associate Professor of Economics & Finance
>School of Economics and Finance
>Campbelltown Campus, Building 11 Room 30,
>s.keen@uws.edu.au 61 2 4620-3016 Fax 61 2 4626-6683
>Home 02 9580-4663 Mobile 0409 716 088

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Apr 02 2002 - 00:00:06 EST