Re: [OPE-L] Repec archive

From: Paul Cockshott (wpc@DCS.GLA.AC.UK)
Date: Sun Dec 09 2007 - 16:32:12 EST

The reference to Nove should have been 'Economics of a Feasible Socialism' not 'Viable'

Paul Cockshott
Dept of Computing Science
University of Glasgow
+44 141 330 3125

-----Original Message-----
From: OPE-L on behalf of Paul Cockshott
Sent: Sun 09/12/2007 9:27 PM
Subject: [OPE-L] Repec archive
I have just had the Munich Repec archive refuse to accept
Towards a New Socialism on their archive on the grounds that

"The contribution appears to be of non-academic nature. This is superficial, full of claims but neither empirical or logical proves of them. There is almost nothing new in this "new socialism". All these things were already stated and discussed by many other authors, sometimes even a century ago. Some of the more technical stuff, like planning with the use of Input-Output models, "labor value" calculation or use of computer simulations for planning purposes are presented too simply and imprecisely without even mentioning more sophisticated and complex aspects as for example linear, nonlinear and dynamic programming or theory of games models. A lot of other relevant theories are not mentioned but even worse, the references to literature show that they are unknown to the authors."

I am of course going to challenge this as it seems to me that a definite element of political bias is present in this refusal.
I am not claiming that everything in our book was new in 1993, nor that it gives a coverage of nonlinear and dynamic
programming which it does not, though it does discuss algorithms for linear programming. I will argue that it
remains a serious academic work and is posed at a somewhat higher level of technical detail to the book
to which it was a riposte, Noves 'Economics of a Viable Socialism'.

The editor is not obliged to agree with all of the works posted on the archive, but his definition of 'an academic nature' 
seems closely related to whether he agrees with the views put forward in a work. 
The fact the he puts quotes round "labour value" indicates a partisan interpretation. 

1) Have any other members had difficulties having marxist work accepted by the archive
2) In arguing for the acceptance of the work in the archive it would help me if I could give instances of
   people citing it in academic papers or using it as recomended reading in any courses.
   I can find citations using Google Scholar, but it would be of assistance if anyone on the
   list could tell me if they have ever suggested it as reading matter in courses.

Paul Cockshott
Dept of Computing Science
University of Glasgow
+44 141 330 3125


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Dec 31 2007 - 00:00:04 EST