[Marxism] As regards Mahmood's pronouncements about Marx's theory
andromeda246 at hetnet.nl
Tue Dec 14 11:31:36 MST 2004
Yeah, you get these people who first say that everything you said was
rubbish, and then act surprised if you don't patiently explain yourself, as
if you hadn't already done it. BTW I did find one statement by Mahmood that
"Criticism of private ownership and market existed before Marx." Yep. That's
true. Very good.
For the rest, all his ill-digested pronouncements about Marx are false, as
any reputable Marx scholar can confirm and explain in detail. But I don't
feel like going into a lot of trouble of explaining these simplest errors,
because a discussion presupposes a willingness to at least consider and
respect somebody else's point of view,
"in good faith". Mahmood simply ignores and dismisses all that I wrote on
the topic, in order to vent a bunch of ill-considered assertions.
That's fine, he can do that, "vrijheid blijheid" as we say in Dutch, but in
that case I am not motivated to respond, I have a lot of other work to do.
And after all, my discussion was really with Dr O'Lincoln, who made
considerable effort to respond and explain his views about the economic role
of the state, and about wage-labour, which exist in all countries (but
side-stepping the analytical problem of the criteria for defining an economy
as capitalist, by talking about Indonesia and the Australian prime minister
and suchlike; interesting stuff, but not directly relevant to the topic).
Many leftists like to rant about capitalism as the root of all evil, but I
don't belong to that school and I consider that one ought at least to
acquaint oneself with what it is, when you've got it, and when you haven't.
And if we cannot even do that, something has gone deeply wrong, and we're
really doing no better than christianists talking about Satan's influence in
More information about the Marxism