[Marxism] Another review of Heinrich

Greg McDonald gregmc59 at gmail.com
Tue May 28 17:01:19 MDT 2013


Louis wrote:


"Maybe Matthijs should be on Social Security like me before he decides that
Marxists should oppose "purely distributional responses". Or maybe take a
look at Leon Trotsky's Transitional Program:"

To wit:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2332249/German-Finance-Minister-Wolfgang-Schaeuble-warns-revolution-Europe-adopts-Americas-tougher-welfare-model.html


On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 4:41 PM, james pitman <marinercarpentry at gmail.com>wrote:

> ======================================================================
> Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> ======================================================================
>
>
> Louis put: "I remain skeptical about any connection between having a
> "correct" line on the FROP or LTV and knowing what to do politically."
>
> I agree actually, I do think Heinrich's correct and I think many of
> the communisation theorists have the correct reading of Marx, as
> opposed to a lot of distortions that came primarily from Engels (I
> know many on here disagree, I'm not trying to rehash that debate).
> BUT, I think Louis is right - the communisation theorists particularly
> are ending up reproducing the sort of theoretical purity they so
> disparage the Leninists for.
>
> In the mean time, food banks keep sprouting up whilst the rich get richer.
>
> I don't think this should lead to being anti-theoretical though - it's
> important that it was a distorted reading of Capital was used to
> legitimise the affirmation, rather than abolition of labour in many of
> the Soviet states.
>
> Jamie
>
> Ps - On the review, I know Mattihjs, and discussed the review on
> facebook with him, and I kinda got him to admit the parts about the
> transformation problem and realisation are simply wrong.
>
> On 28 May 2013 21:07, Louis Proyect <lnp3 at panix.com> wrote:
> > ======================================================================
> > Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> > ======================================================================
> >
> >
> > On 5/28/13 3:46 PM, Robert Schardein wrote:
> >>
> >> Thought I would throw Matthijs Krul to the value-form wolves:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> http://mccaine.org/2013/05/26/book-review-michael-heinrich-an-introduction-to-the-three-volumes-of-marxs-capital/
> >
> >
> > I remain skeptical about any connection between having a "correct" line
> on
> > the FROP or LTV and knowing what to do politically. Here's Matthijs from
> a
> > North Star interview:
> >
> > "One major consequence of Kliman’s consistent application of Marxist
> > economics is the emphasis on opposing purely distributional responses —
> all
> > these Marxo-Keynesian attempts to ‘stimulate’ by redistributing wealth,
> or
> > restoring the welfare state, or calling for nationalizations and public
> > investment works. Instead, as Kliman shows, the contradiction of capital
> > means you have to choose between one of two evils: either ameliorate the
> > crisis now by emergency measures of that kind, and suffer a worse one
> soon,
> > or ride out the storm, with all the attendant unemployment, immiseration,
> > and unfreedom we have seen in the Great Depression and the Victorian age.
> > Neither option is desirable: that’s exactly why capitalism itself is the
> > problem, and must be overthrown."
> >
> > Maybe Matthijs should be on Social Security like me before he decides
> that
> > Marxists should oppose "purely distributional responses". Or maybe take a
> > look at Leon Trotsky's Transitional Program:
> >
> > "The struggle against unemployment is not to be considered without the
> > calling for a broad and bold organization of public works. But public
> works
> > can have a continuous and progressive significance for society, as for
> the
> > unemployed themselves, only when they are made part of a general plan
> worked
> > out to cover a considerable number of years. Within the framework of this
> > plan, the workers would demand resumption, as public utilities, of work
> in
> > private businesses closed as a result of the crisis. Workers’ control in
> > such case: would be replaced by direct workers’ management."
> >
> > Despite my allergy to mathematics (I was a whiz in algebra back in 1960
> but
> > that was in another country and besides the wench is dead), I will plunge
> > into these matters tomorrow while my lovely wife is attending her
> conference
> > in lovely San Jose, Costa Rica.
> >
> > We got into the hotel last night where the conference was to be held and
> > discovered that it was overbooked. To assuage us and other conference
> guests
> > that also discovered that their registration was for naught, the hotel
> put
> > us in 5-star hotel at the same rate. I feel like Leonard DiCaprio.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________________________
> > Send list submissions to: Marxism at greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
> > Set your options at:
> >
> http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/marinercarpentry%40gmail.com
>
> ________________________________________________
> Send list submissions to: Marxism at greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
> Set your options at:
> http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/gregmc59%40gmail.com
>



More information about the Marxism mailing list