Re: (OPE-L) Re: Paresh Chattopadhyay 'Capital, The Progenitor of Socialism'

From: michael a. lebowitz (mlebowit@SFU.CA)
Date: Sun Dec 21 2003 - 10:13:28 EST

At 13:46 20/12/2003, rakesh wrote:

>>>You're not actually suggesting that Paresh is a "conservative",
>>>are you?
>>>In solidarity, Jerry
>>No more so than Nathan Rosenberg who made much the same argument, I
>>believe, and to whom Harry Cleaver responded. Seriously, what would you
>>call someone who, if Cuba's project were to collapse, might say Marx had
>>the last laugh or who might argue against accelerating the process in
>>Venezuela because, in the absence of the fully developed capitalist mode of
>>production, all attempts at exploding the society would be Don Quixotism?
>in the absence of workers' revolutions in the so called North or
>West, such accelerations of the process are likely to fail, to be
>quixotic.  It's absurd to say that Chattopadyay's analysis points in
>the same direction as Nathan Rosenberg's.

         Three questions:
                 (1) What do you propose that revolutionaries in Venezuela do?
                 (2) What do you propose that revolutionaries in Cuba do?
                 (3) How does Paresh's position on the reasons for failure
of the USSR, etc differ from that of Rosenberg?

                         in solidarity,

Michael A. Lebowitz
Professor Emeritus
Economics Department
Simon Fraser University
Burnaby, B.C., Canada V5A 1S6
Office Fax:   (604) 291-5944
Home:   Phone (604) 689-9510

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Dec 23 2003 - 00:00:01 EST