Re: [OPE-L] Incoherence of the TSSI - consensus

From: Rakesh Bhandari (bhandari@BERKELEY.EDU)
Date: Mon Oct 22 2007 - 10:22:17 EDT

Anders and Fred,
I think it is obvious that there is something very disturbing about this
dialogue. Please recognize that this discussion is not moving along
rationally. The TSSI people are not on this list to defend themselves
against what they would try to show to be inaccurate, petty and scurrilous
charges.  I have read Kliman's book and had a long email exchange with one
of his brightest followers, but am disallowed from challenging
misrepresentations on this list. I am not by any means in total agreement
with the book, but it is a challenging and serious book, and I agree with
Roberto Veneziani's specific praise.

My sense is that to the extent the TSSI school has won sympathy,--and
Kliman's book has received several favorable responses, not all of course
by Marxist economists!--it may be in small part be due to strong rejection
of the kinds of statements (I won't say arguments) made against it on this

> At 02:11 22.10.2007, Jerry wrote:
>> >> My impression is that K&F are very serious Marxist economist,
>>Hi Anders:
>>You do know that Andrew doesn't consider himself to be a Marxist
>>economist, don't you?
> This is a bit hairsplitting. Kliman wrote Reclaiming Marx' Capital.
> That book is taking Marx dead serious. If Kliman is not a Marxist
> economist, then nobody is. Even Marx said "I am not a Marxist", but
> in an ironic sense.
>> > If they are
>> > sectarian, let us respond to that with arguments, be more tolerant
>> > than they are.
>>Been there, done that. Over the course of many, many years.  It hasn't
>>worked.  If/when they commit outrages, then they should be held to task
>>for that. Had you and others been more willing to confront them about
>>those offenses then I wouldn't have had to.
> But you are not calling for support in your fight of what you see as
> their sectarianism, you call for a vote on:
> a) In their use of logic
> b) their reporting of the views of those with whom they disagree
> c) and in the elaboration of their own fundamental categories
> ... and that is quite the same thing.
>>I also am pressed for time at the moment so I will leave it at that for
>>now.  I'll respond tomorrow - I hope - to Fred's questions.
> Let's end the exchange on "the vote" here and follow up Fred's
> thread. That's a better use of our time.
> Regards
> Anders

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Oct 31 2007 - 00:00:19 EDT