Brenner in context
CharlesB at SPAMCNCL.ci.detroit.mi.us
Mon Nov 27 10:53:56 MST 2000
Yes, Henry !
We are proving that revolution can be fun, at least theoretically.
>>> hliu at mindspring.com 11/27/00 10:42AM >>>
Oops, I was a tenured professor at UCLA, but I redeemed myself by resigning in 1969
for Columbia and other universities subsequently and finally left academia all
together in 1985.
As to formaulae, here is an interesting one I reveived this morning:
Dilbert's "Salary Theorem" states that "Engineers and scientists can never earn as
much as business executives and sales people."
This theorem can now be supported by a mathematical equationbased on the following two
As every engineer knows: Power = Work / Time
Knowledge = Power
Time = Money
Knowledge = Work/Money.
Solving for Money, we get:
Money = Work / Knowledge.
Thus, as Knowledge approaches zero, Money approaches
of the amount of work done.
The less you know, the more you make.
Charles Brown wrote:
> >>> furuhashi.1 at osu.edu 11/26/00 12:27PM >>>
> You'd have to _demonstrate_ the long equation (or free association?)
> that you want us to accept: a UCLA professor = Analytical Marxism =
> G. A. Cohen = Stagism = the Second International = Social Darwinism =
> Karl Kautsky = Georgi Plekhanov =
> CB: To me, from my experience with the items in this equation, if we make them
>whiggly lines for approximately as opposed to exactly equal, I can follow the
>connection. Kautskyism is a form of vulgar Marxism, although I am not sure Kautsky
>himself was a social darwininist.
> I take Analytical Marxism to be a type of non-dialectical and thereby mechanical
>materialism. At a theoretical level,this has a lot in common with vulgar Marxism,
>Kautskyism , opportunism.
> On the enemy of the revolution part, by and in 1917 Plekhanov literally had fallen
>so out of it that he opposed the insurrection in October. And in a way, if we allow a
>counterfactual that Kautskyism and the 2nd International blew the main historical
>opportunity ( as we see with hindsight) for socialist revolution in advanced European
>countries like Germany and France. Again counterfactually , this could have been the
>difference in success of world revolution in this period, era. However, Analytical
>Marxism is relatively academic compared to the 2nd International.
> an Enemy of the Revolution = Hal
> Draper = Solidarity = _Against the Current_ = Max Shachtman = a
> theory of "State Capitalism" & "Bureaucratic Collectivism." And then
> you need to _demonstrate_ that all of the above is indeed synthesized
> in Brenner's works, with textual evidence from them.
> If we follow this line of reasoning, though, we must, to take just
> one example, conclude that C. L. R. James was an enemy of the
> Revolution, for he, unlike Robert Brenner, indeed wrote a book called
> _State Capitalism and World Revolution_, with Raya Dunayevskaya &
> Grace Lee.
> Actually, I wonder why you didn't name C. L. R. James as one of the
> guilty parties with whom you allege Brenner is associated, since it
> was the Johnson-Forest Tendency that introduced the idea of "state
> CB: I don't know if I would call it enemies of the revolution. There is some
>anti-Sovietism in it.
More information about the Marxism