RE: Spirito di Bergamo

riccardo bellofiore (
Wed, 21 Jan 1998 09:58:45 +0100

There was an error in the previous post. I have added what was missing in
capital blocks here below. Apologies


At 8:43 -0000 21-01-1998, riccardo bellofiore wrote:
>Andrew, may be I was not clear enough. When I am critical towards the logic
>of "us" vs. "them" I am not saying that it necessarily means a policy of
>collecing only the "us" and of refusing to talk with the "them". I am
>simply stating that the idea that today it is useful to engage a dialogue
>with non-Marxians saying: well, I am a Marxian, you are a not-Marxian, let
>us talk together


>. I insist that this policy I understand, and it is quite
>sensible. BUT my idea of a dialogue in this case is different: I don't
>think that the Marxians are one front and the not-Marxians another, BECAUSE
>very often the distance between self-proclaimed Marxians is LARGER than the
>distance of some Marxians with some not-Marxians.
>What your declaration says, and I am happy with that, is the following:
>there is no standard either on value or on Marx. This does not exclude that
>a certain percentage (I guess, an high percentage) of the self-proclaimed
>Marxians will engage in a pluralistic dialogue saying: this is the value
>theory of Karl Marx; what's your answer? The fact that those who says so
>will present several different "Marx's value theory" does not change the
>mood. I was simply stating that this is not my approach.
>As for the IWGVT I said "may be" the approach is this one.


> I apologize if I
>am wrong. As a personal reaction to last year choices made by the IWGVT I
>must say this: as an individual, I am more interested in the past
>discussion within the IWGVT as a discussion group (mainly) among
>self-proclaimed Marxians. And I am more interested in the discussion in the
>OPE-L as a discussion among self-proclaimed Marxians. NOT because this
>means that I want to discuss with what is nearer to my views (I just said
>the opposite!).


> because I find legitimate ALSO that there is a place where
>this kind of dialogues is going on. If I have to discuss with PKT, or
>Schumpeterians, or Austrian, I can do that all over the world.
>But, I repeat, these are personal impressions. Not criticisms. I think your
>work (and Alan's) in organizing these mini-conferences all over these years
>is wonderful.
>P.S.: let me state once again that I do NOT vote AGAINST the enlargement of
>the list.