[Marxism] The class nature of the Chinese state
brownh at hartford-hwp.com
Sat Oct 20 05:38:46 MDT 2007
I don't understand.
How can I get away with saying such provocative things without at
least someone challenging them? Whether true or not, at least the
points below are entirely logical and transparent, and yet carry the
implication that much of the discussion on this list is really
non-Marxist and fundamentally flawed.
If someone told me that, I'd scream and yell.
> No explanation of any situation is possible without combining a)
> solid theory of how social systems work, and b) empirical data. So
> there's no point in "engaging the economic details" unless we agree
> first on what theoretical tool to employ.
> ... the empirical specifics of China (or the USSR) are _entirely_
> meaningless without employing a satisfactory theory, an appropriate
> mode of production.
> ... the time is now ripe for a reconstruction of the "mode of
> production" theoretical tool so that we might begin to make use of
> the empirical data.
> The starting point for this must surely be the ontological status of
> theory, which "scientific realism" now addresses very neatly. In
> other words, we shouldn't venture to make sense of China or the USSR
> without starting out from a scientific realist foundation (Marx is
> widely considered to have been a scientific realist, incidentally).
Haines Brown, KB1GRM
More information about the Marxism