[OPE-L:7205] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: fundamentalism

From: Rakesh Bhandari (rakeshb@stanford.edu)
Date: Fri May 17 2002 - 12:34:02 EDT

>At 11:12 -0700 16-05-2002, Rakesh Bhandari wrote:
>>It is time for Levy to step down. It's that simple.
>No, I think we ALL have to stop and relax. And one of the main 
>reasons is that almost nobody seems to be able to accept its normal 
>(and may be wrong) share of criticism without either launching 
>unpleasant attacks or claiming to having been  harassed (I don't 
>know if this is the exact term, my English is not very good).

Since you re-raised the topic, Riccardo, let me respond.

I do not feel harrassed by anything Levy said. I am not a TSS'er. I 
have submitted criticism of the TSS school for being too anti 
physicalist. I miss the presence of Alejandro in particular because I 
learned a great deal from him. That is why I was opposed to the 
gratuituous ad hominem criticism made by Levy of Kliman. This will 
discourage Alejandro, and Julian and Alan and Massimo and John Ernst 
and god knows who else from returning.

How can any honest person think that the worst fights that Kliman has 
had--and those would be the ones with Sinha and Skillman--resulted 
from Kliman's primary research interest being hermeneutics as an end 
in itself (which has the same relevance to real Marxism as personal 
gardening) while Sinha and Skillman are primarily interested in 
understanding and struggling against real capitalism?

What Levy posted was a flame, a nuisance post. Please speak to what I 
am saying.

>This seems particularly true in the case of all the things touching 
>TSS in general and Andrew Kliman in particular. No phrase 
>criticising their intellectual practice, even politely, seems to be 
>acceptable. So, you're right, for a bad reason.

No, if Levy had reiterated his criticism of the TSS assumption of 
v=0, I would not be saying a word, but nodding in assent. If Gary 
reiterated the epistemological and methodological advantages of 
assuming long run equilibrium prices in certain analytical contexts, 
I would not say a word. If someone agreed with my specific criticism 
of how TSS is too anti physicalist, I would be happy. If someone 
elaborated Duncan's profound criticism of how TSS has lost sense of 
the dynamics of the changing MEL in the course of accumulation, I 
would be thrilled.
I am appalled by the kind of criticism Levy recently launched.

>I tkink there are a lot of other more interesting issues to debate

I hope that I have given some indication of what those interesting 
issues are. They are not whether Kliman is no more a real Marxist 
than someone whose primary research interest is personal gardening!

If you think about it, you will see that I am not wrong to be 
bothered by a moderator making the kind of criticism that Levy 
recently did. Because he has set back the reassimilation of TSS 
people (Alejandro in particular), he needs to step down.


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