Absolute and relative surplus value
rahul at peaches.ph.utexas.edu
Sun Aug 18 03:06:18 MDT 1996
>Hugh publicly informs Richard (as if the rest of us didn't already know):
>>[t]he stuff we have been arguing about is elementary.
>Of course it is, Hugh, but that is the whole point, is it not, to take
>fairly simple--"elementary"--concepts and, through the competent employment
>of purple prose and obscure jargon, render them inapprehensible to all but
>a handful of fellow pedants?
>Richard's self-deprecating remark--if it is indeed genuine--is touching in
>its naivete. Even now, I suspect, his "congratulatees" are snickering
>over his drooling, ill-advised "apology." He will learn--if he sticks
>around long enough--that the real "apology" for the Marxism list is due,
>not to those who hold high their intellectual pretensions, but, rather,
>from those whose committment to Marxism and social change goes no further
>than technical gibberish and superficial arguments.
Lou, drop the vitriol. We know you're angry, like many people on the list.
No need to remind us. When you're not foaming at the mouth, you have a lot
to say that's very much worth hearing, although I think you're taking an
awfully soft, reformist approach to the CPUSA's support for Clinton. It's
not just tactically wrong (which it is also, as you said), it's giving up
the whole game for nothing. Why don't you give us some more coherent
nonsuperficial arguments, as you have been doing recently, instead of
taking umbrage at schoolmasters? Or taking digs at people who haven't yet
realized what a bellum omnium contra omnes this list really is.
Was it Zeynep and Rakesh who were supposed to be "snickering," or have I
missed something? Rakesh definitely doesn't seem to be the type to do that.
Oh, yeah. I haven't forgotten that in your book I'm one of "those whose
committment to Marxism and social change goes no further than technical
gibberish and superficial arguments." What can I say? Somehow, I'm dealing
If you decide to respond to me, no need to be so respectful to me just
because I'm highly educated. "Rahul" is just fine; "Mr. Peaches" is
definitely not necessary, unless you're feeling particularly low on
self-esteem. I don't even make my students address me that way.
--- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---
More information about the Marxism