Re: [OPE-L] reply to Ian W

From: GERALD LEVY (gerald_a_levy@MSN.COM)
Date: Tue Oct 30 2007 - 04:00:45 EDT

>The published work in the 80's on value theory is generally of a
>higher quality than what we get today: with Steedman's contribution
>and the Marxist reaction to it we find a peculiarly sharp, frank and
>productive exchange. Steedman, to his great credit, ratcheted up the
>rhetoric by accusing Marxist defenders of the LTV of not understanding
>basic arithmetic and the rules of logic: a more highly charged
>critique than suggesting that a theory may unconsciously reflect the
>interests of a particular economic class.
>But this is how understanding progresses: by critique and
>counter-critique. It does not progress by keeping one's views private
>for fear of offending the other party, which is the essence of the
>advice you give at the beginning of this thread.


We obviously have a very different take on that period, but I'm not
going to respond more to that now given your silly accusations

>I also note your repeated pejorative references in this thread to the
>TSSI school, despite  TSSI being tangential to the point in hand. In
>the spirit of exchange I have some debating advice for you too: resist
>the temptation of using OPE-L to promote your personal vendetta
>against the TSSI.

(To put it in the most mild way possible) uniformed, silly comments like the
above will always and everywhere (including here on OPE-L) result in sharp
My comment about the TSSI  in the previous post spoke *exactly* to the issue
hand.  Since you refer to some of the literature from the 1980s surely you
have known that.  And, if not, you could have asked instead of making an
Did the articles by Freeman and Giussani, for example, in Mandel and
Freeeman ed.
_Ricardo, Marx, Sraffa_ slip your mind?   In the future, please be so kind
as to not
take cheap and uniformed shots at me.  Moreover, *please* do not mistake
theoretical and political criticism for "ad hominem" and "personal vendetta"
unless you
want to ratchet up the rhetoric to creschendo levels.  There has been an
tendency in the past on the list do do this, e.g. absurdly claiming that
criticism of the v = 0 assumption was part of a pattern of "suppression".
If you can't distinguish accurately
between theoretical criticism and a "personal vendetta" then you need to
take up some
other interest, like gardening.

Also, btw, don't bring up the issues again of Freeman and Co. leaving the
list unless you actually *want* me to get into that topic on the list again.
  I willl
resist the temptation to bite at your worm.

In solidarity, Jerry

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Oct 31 2007 - 00:00:20 EDT