[OPE-L:7179] Re: Re: fundamentalism

From: Rakesh Bhandari (rakeshb@stanford.edu)
Date: Wed May 15 2002 - 17:02:52 EDT

>Re [7l75-6]:
>Rakesh (or should I say Bhandari?):

I don't care.

>You need to read more carefully what I write.
>In solidarity, Jerry
>>  I think one of the problems with our communication is that the *focus*
>>  of our concerns has been different: for Kliman, his _primary
>>  research focus_ has, to date, been hermeneutic;

First you have misrepresented your own quotation. This putative 
independent clause did  not end with a semi colon--why did you put 
that there?-- but a comma which was itself preceded by a 
parenthetical expression. What you meant to convey can only be 
grasped by the contrast that you were making, so what followed the 
comma is thus an integral part of the putative independent clause 
which you now set apart by a semi colon that did not appear in the 

This is what you wrote, and note that unlike you I quoted the entire 
sentence. You make it seem that you have quoted the main idea of your 
sentence by using a semi colon. If you had ended the setentence with 
a comma or ellipses, it would have been clear that what you are 
saying in the quoted indepedent clause may not be clear outside the 
context of the rest of the sentence.

It's a subtle but dishonest trick. I feel sorry for you.

>In other words,
>Kliman has been mainly focused on what is essentially a *history of
>political economy question* (i.e. what is the interpretation of Marx's
>quantitative theory that is the most consistent and has the best textual
>evidence when placed in the context of Marx's overall theory?),
>whereas many other Marxists are focused on comprehending and
>struggling against the dynamics of  capitalism..

This is a dishonest and untrue and irrelevant and petty criticism of 
Kliman: Kliman's interest in the putative hermeneutic question is 
wrapped up in his efforts to comprehend and struggle against the 
dynamics of capitalism of which I would imagine he does no less  than 
most Marxists on this list.
Even his most theoretical writings on the FROP attempt to put the 
focus on the struggle against capitalism in the exploitation of 
living labor in the abode of production.

So I did read carefully the entire sentence and the entire nuisance 
post that you did write. You implied that unlike Marxists who are 
interested in struggling against and understanding the dynamics of 
capital, Kliman is bogged down in the world of hermeneutics, but 
there is no proof and no reason for your accusation that Kliman gets 
bogged down in hermeneutics  as end in itself (which is certainly 
what you implied) as opposed to the reason of comprehending and 
clarifying the struggle against the dynamics of capitalism.   In that 
post you also mocked what you took to be Kliman's main focus as 
having the same relevance for Marxism as personal gardening. This was 
all simply mean spirited.

It is of course possible that you do not understand what you yourself 
write and imply. For my purposes you had already proven to me in the 
exchange about slavery that you do not in fact abide by the rules of 
rational argumentation. This only cements the case.

I am quite glad that your moderating power is now shared by others. 
Given your ethics and heart condition, you should excuse yourself.


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Jun 02 2002 - 00:00:07 EDT