Re: [OPE-L] Truncating Marx

From: glevy@PRATT.EDU
Date: Tue Sep 11 2007 - 06:20:36 EDT

> My problem with the TSSI is that
> they don't succeed in doing what they claim.  They don't make Marx
> consistent;

Hi  David:

Yes, I  agree - but for reasons you didn't suggest.

Within the Kliman-McGlone interpretation of the transformation, prices of
production can change for reasons excluded by Marx.  This was demonstrated
very concincingly by Fred.

Fred and I, though, differ on the implications of his critique. I think he
is not really aware or is unwilling to accept the force of his own
critique.  I think it's very clear that *if* the Kliman-McGlone position
on what can change prices of production within the context of the
transformation is correct, *then*  Marx's perspective *must be*  logically
inconsistent and the Kliman-McGlone perspective on what can change prices
of production is a *superior* theory to that suggested by Marx.  The irony
here is obvious: if the Kliman-McGlone perspective is accepted then they
have succeeded in demonstrating conclusively that Marx's theory was
internally inconsistent: the "defenders of Marx" are thus revealed as the
"correctors" of Marx! If they were to accept the fact that they have
suggested a plausible *correction* of Marx's perspective then we could
begin to move to the next question: is their *new theory* actually a
superior theory to that advanced by other theorists, including Marx? That
is, we could address their perspective outside of the narrow and stale
focus on hermeneutics.

In solidarity, Jerry

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Sep 30 2007 - 00:00:05 EDT