Centrally planned economy

Kevin Cabral kcabral at freenet.columbus.oh.us
Sun Jun 2 11:17:09 MDT 1996

On Sun, 2 Jun 1996, Louis N Proyect wrote:

> > 1) His emphasis on the technical computing power capable of
> > centrally planning an economy is written in a way that might
> > imply a deterministic top-down approach. In fact I would
> > understand that if banks of micro-chips are linked together to
> > produce the power required, they would act together in a non-linear way.
> > I would appreciate assurance that this is not an obstacle to the model.

> Louis: The main value of Paul and Allin's book is not as a blueprint for
> socialism. I see it rather as a powerful refutation of market socialism,
> especially Nove's. Market socialism is a theoretical construct that
> emerged out of the crisis of "actually existing" socialism. What
> seduced leftist intellectuals in the West was the view that planned
> economies made everything go wrong. Paul and Allin simply challenged this
> view with a concept that is entirely reasonable in itself: socialism can
> be, and must be, planned. Unless there is planning, there will be a profit
> motive. With a profit motive, all the same old shit comes back. This is
> why Yeltsin is running Russia and not market socialist Gorbachev.

	Gorbachev a market socialist? He certainly had nothing to do with
the model of market socialism advocated in Against Capitalism. Gorbachev
was more a social democrat then a market socialist, there is a difference.
Do you agree? Why or why not?

	Also, please respond to the criticism of Cockshott and your
"super-computer" system as being top-down in your response to my initial
challenge. Do you agree or disagree that Cockshott's model is highly
top-down and essentially orders workers to produce this and that like a
plantation owner would order a farm-hand?

Cols, Oh

     --- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---

More information about the Marxism mailing list