Re: [Marxism] ‘Politics of Hate’ Takes a Toll in Germany Well Beyond Immigrants
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * Just to add to what Michael wrote, the acts of political violence mentioned - in Hanau, Cologne, and in Kassel - are all West German cities. One of the most pernicious lies of "totalitarianism theory" is the notion that the rise of far-right violence can somehow be laid at the feet of the GDR. Michael Yates wrote: >>It is disingenuous for the author of this NYT article to decry the lack of >>understanding among former East Germans about the wonders of democracy. The >>West German state never got rid of its Nazis. Far from it. They regained >>control, if they ever lost it, of their business empires. They were often >>quickly "rehabilitated" and went into politics. They continued to hold sway >>in the German military. This is all not to mention that reunification >>involved the pillage of the E. German economy and the immiseration of most of >>its people. Democracy has little to do with German affairs, just as it has >>little relevance for life here.<< _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] The Actuality of Marx's Communism by Michael Heinrich
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hExl5k3CSjo _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] No Way Out but Through | Commune
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * I wrote: > Someone should probably update the Commune editorial board about the fact > that Aufstehen is completely dead as a political > formation, and was arguably DOA, barely lasting past its own launching. It > was such a damp squib that Sahra Wagenknecht's > political career hasn't > survived, and she's stepping down as Die Linke co-chair. Sorry, misspoke; stepping down as parliamentary fraction chair; the co-chairs of the party are Katja Kipping and Bernd Riexinger. _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] No Way Out but Through | Commune
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * Quote: > the new formation of Aufstehen farcically demands a Fortress Leftism to keep > pace with Alternative für Deutschland Someone should probably update the Commune editorial board about the fact that Aufstehen is completely dead as a political formation, and was arguably DOA, barely lasting past its own launching. It was such a damp squib that Sahra Wagenknecht's political career hasn't survived, and she's stepping down as Die Linke co-chair. _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Sorry Damon Lindelof, I Don’t Open Your ‘Watchmen’ Blackmail on HBO | Washington Babylon
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * > Watchmen did not and does not require a sequel because it said absolutely > everything that needed to be said about not just > superheroes, but the entire literary genre of comics I agree with the sentiment that Watchmen does not need a sequel, but this sentence is nonsense. Comics is not a "literary genre", comics is not a "genre", period. Comics is a "form" or "medium", like cinema, prose, or painting, and Watchmen, while arguably the final statement on the _genre_ of superheroes, is not in any way all that needs to be said about the _form_ or _medium_ of comics. Spend some time with Harvey Pekar, Julie Doucet, or Robert Crumb's autobiographical material, Chris Ware's historical dramas like Jimmy Corrigan or Rusty Brown, Charles Burns' sci-fi/body-horror "Black Hole"; Peter Bagge's situation comedy "Buddy Bradley" stories from "Hate", the magical realist melodramas of Gilbert and Jaime Hernandez, or the genre-defying works of Daniel Clowes to see the cream of what the comics form has to offer. Comics is not superheroes, and Watchmen, while great, is not all the medium has to offer; it's not even the _best_ the medium has to offer. _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] Counterpunch: The Intellectual Development of Karl Marx
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * Fantastic review, Louis. The material on Gans and Hegel is really the heart of the book, and you've done it justice. https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/09/13/the-intellectual-development-of-karl-marx/ _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] Michael Heinrich on RTP Bolivia
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * Discussing the complete edition of Marx's London notebooks of 1851. https://twitter.com/rtp_bolivia/status/1169447352047931392 _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] 44 percent of workers in Brandenburg voted AfD yesterday
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * The data is self-reported, so take that for what it's worth. The available categories being "workers", "salaried employees", "self-employed", and "retirees/pensioners". I'm curious what the breakdown for Saxony looks like. Am Montag, 2. September 2019, 23:31:59 MESZ hat Mark Lause Folgendes geschrieben: This doesn't tell us anything about how they're defining the category? Or what was going on in other places? I rethink things continually, but haven't had much reason to reconsider my sense that these terms have little practical meaning the way most people use them. On Mon, Sep 2, 2019, 11:39 AM Angelus Novus via Marxism wrote: POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * Interesting breakdown by social class: https://twitter.com/formelfriedrich/status/1168402855880994816 In confronting the rise of authoritarian far-right populism, Marxists should really re-think the old Trotskyist shibboleths about fascism being a primarily petit-bourgeois or "Bonapartist" phenomenon. It's pretty clear that the new far-right has a substantial proletarian base. _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/markalause%40gmail.com _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] 44 percent of workers in Brandenburg voted AfD yesterday
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * Interesting breakdown by social class: https://twitter.com/formelfriedrich/status/1168402855880994816 In confronting the rise of authoritarian far-right populism, Marxists should really re-think the old Trotskyist shibboleths about fascism being a primarily petit-bourgeois or "Bonapartist" phenomenon. It's pretty clear that the new far-right has a substantial proletarian base. _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Robert Crumb and friends flush Donald Trump down the toilet, 1989 | Dangerous Minds
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * The (outdated) link given to buy the comics is to some third party Amazon seller, but the ethical thing to do is order them directly from the Crumb family. My local comic shop had these reprints; they're indistinguishable from the Last Gasp printings except they have a "Crumb Comix" logo: https://www.crumbproducts.com/pages/books_comics.html _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] [SUSPICIOUS MESSAGE] The 'Marx' in Marxism
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * "in his book, Heinrich is saying something very different. Something we hardly find in biographies nowadays. Heinrich demonstrates that teleology in biographies is a rather poor construction, overlooking the moments of contingency, which exist in everyone’s life. The young Marx’s life grew along multiple trajectories and under the influence of various philosophical and poetic themes. It is important to understand the different processes in which Marx evolved as a person, political activist, as a theorist, and finally as a revolutionary. This book helps understand Marx as a person." http://secure-web.cisco.com/187W5gGe2rD8rQC1Ojnx3lHzDoiOOdyz1TSv9vc8xIwlAfac3_oFDKxP0XcrVB1ocS8f5wBpOtogKFpWls25YXM87p8Q9c0-ULzv_ndhnYeS9qvDPIfNf6Xh5xQgNy3xkmmfo8Yy9qh8sUeEpRJ-X34_qR_bkMZNYZE93Bu5MXbM17iX_di9XBmtUpx_xd1CmSDKSd6L33nzK00u7TLNikyRKDLjktXZoXJj9x-QAgGiGrU68SqTri6K-dHda-JeSjq7WFEObG_2DzBEiutfjNMwHLih6BlarDWzlf8QClQ_NXazOs1nPDaozKMCj_nknfQL6wwl9E1WtwrVChqEkWvdWeC6Tkrq0QLeIcmPrC-SgoXxpdVbyRJ_QnmAwBRpVPMo2MFx5auyDx2RB3AbAKw/http%3A%2F%2Ftns.thenews.com.pk%2Fmarx-marxism%2F _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] The Actuality of of Marx's Critique of Political Economy in the 21st Century
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * Talk by Michael Heinrich at the Subversive Festival in Zagreb, Croatia this past spring: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgnZAlBpT24 _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] The Misconception about Baby Boomers and the Sixties | The New Yorker
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * The article is no doubt correct, but on the other hand, I think it would be fair to say that young boomers were substantially involved in 1970s labor struggles such as the wildcat at Dodge Truck in 1974, or the 1972 Lordstown Strike. A few authors have pointed out that it wasn't until "the 70s" that "the 60s" had reached the industrial working class, and it's undoubtedly the case that many of those workers were young boomers. Generational distinctions are sort of arbitrary and meaningless anyway. _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] Review of Karl Marx and the Birth of Modern Society
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * The review doesn't mention that the English translation is now available from Monthly Review Press. Presumably it was written before publication of the English edition. "Michael Heinrich has raised the standards of biographical writing with Karl Marx and the Birth of Modern Society. In content and scope, it is an unparalleled work of scholarship. It makes Marx relevant to our understanding of capitalist society, while cutting down the overgrown myths about him. It confronts those sworn enemies of Marx’s thought with the weapons of critique. It will challenge the ways avid readers of Marx think about the meaning his times, concepts and ideas have for the present." https://medium.com/@jamespeter_76017/review-karl-marx-and-the-birth-of-modern-society-6e591bbfda01 _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Michael Heinrich Marx bio, volume 1
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * I just want to second what Michael Yates wrote, The level of meticulous scholarship M. Heinrich has brought to bear upon this is absolutely amazing. This first volume, in addition to being a biography of Marx up to 1841, also feels like a social history of Trier and the Rhineland in the post-Napoleonic era, an intellectual history of "Young Hegelianism" (and critical interrogation of the concept of "Young Hegelianism"), _and_ an intellectual meditation on the meaning of biographical writing. Heinrich would probably dispute the notion that there ever can be a definitive biography of Marx, but I definitely think this work will set the standard for decades to come. Given the sheer length of the work, I imagine it will be some time before the first reviews come out, but I'm eagerly anticipating the intellectual engagement with Heinrich's work on this. Monthly Review | Karl Marx and the Birth of Modern Society: The Life of Marx and the Development of His Work (Volume I: 1818-1841) | | | | | | | | | | | Monthly Review | Karl Marx and the Birth of Modern Society: The Life of ... For over a century, Karl Marx’s critique of capitalism has been a crucial resource for social movements. Now, re... | | | Michael Yates wrote: > I think that this will be the definitive Marx bio. It is a remarkable work of > intensive and comprehensive scholarship. _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] Good German Politics
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * Michael Heinrich on Germany vis-à-vis Europe and the rest of the world. http://libcom.org/library/good-german-politics _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Capital vol 3
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * Lüko Willms wrote: > He did not date the main manuscript, but said that it was unfinished and as > such unuseable for > publication. The main manuscript is the 1864-65 Manuscript. This is not even controversial. You simply have to compare Engels published edition of "Capital Vol. III" with the 1864-65 Manuscript. The 1864-65 Manuscript is foundation for Engels' "Capital Vol. III", so much so that for example, in secondary literature one can give references for specific passages using either the MEGA volume containing the 1864-65 manuscript, _or_ MEW 25 containing Engels' edition. > and one chapter is completely written by Engels himself, because Marx had > only noted the > chapter's title. I'm not even sure what the intention of this non sequitur is. Yes, Engels made substantial editorial modifications to the manuscript, and even wrote entire passages himself. Why you think anyone disputes this is beyond me. Or do I misunderstand you and you side with those who dispute the credibility of of Engels edition by pointing out the substantial modifications he made to Marx's original manuscripts? > Regarding the law of the tendential fall of the rate of profit -- this is in > part three > (Chapters 13, 14, 15) This is actually Marx's third chapter of the 1864-65 Manuscript, as Heinrich notes. Given that the whole discussion around FROP was precisely what gave rise to the contention about the sequence in which the manuscripts were written, I thank you for bringing things back full circle and acknowledging that the contentious passages in question were, indeed, written before Volume I. > bourgeois and petty-bourgeois apologists of the capitalist rule. Bro, do you actually use sentences like that in real life? _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Capital vol 3
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * Einde O'Callaghan wrote: > On behalf of MIA I'd like to thank you for the backhanded "compliment" For crying out loud, stop being so butthurt. There was nothing "backhanded" about my compliment. I was simply pointing out to Ferguson that a reference to MIA is not an authoritative statement on anything, especially not such a vague formulation as: "Engels drew on writings written between 1863 and 1883." Engels may have "drawn upon" various manuscripts (as indicated in the MEGA editorial note I quoted), but the 1864/65 manuscript is the foundation for Engels' "Volume III"; there is simply no doubt about that, especially given the practice of some Marx scholars, when citin gpassages, to simultaneous give two references: one to the MEGA edition of the 1864-65 manuscripts, and then a reference to MEW Vol. 25, which is Engels' edition of "Volume III". The 1864/65 manuscript is the foundation for Engels edition of the third volume of Capital, especially for the material concerning FROP (a reminder: this whole mini-tangent came about because someone called into question the validity of FROP on the basis of manuscript used as the basis for Volume III being the oldest). Why are people getting all worked up about the totally non-controversial statement that the manuscript that Engels used as the basis for Volume III (and which provides the textual passages for the material on FROP) is older than the manuscript for Vol. I and the manuscript used for Engels' edition of Volume II? If people want to, I can post passages from the MEGA edition of the 1864-65 manuscript (with Marx's hilariously archaic orthography) alongside passages Engels' edition of Volume III, so they can see for themselves. _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Capital vol 3
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * Lüko Willms: > Engels, being the other half of the siamese twins Amazing how the other half of the siamese twins didn't even know about the existence of the manuscript until Marx's housekeeper found it after his death. > Engels did a great work by completing the work. Engels took an old manuscript, and rendered it into a "Volume III" of Capital, with all the ambiguities that implies. > Without Engels' work we would not be able to read it. Leaving Helena Demuth out of this, are we? No wonder Trots have a reputation for being crusty old white dudes. > If you want to enhance the role of Engels in this work, this is against > Engels' own intention. So much the worse for Engels, then, considering his substantial role in editing and modifying the work. > And they also like to hide the revolutionary strategy the couple pursued in > the 1848/49 revolution, calling for a revolutionary war against Czarist > Russia to reconsitute Poland as an united and independent republic, this > being the necessary precondition for the establishment of not only Germany, > but > also Hungary and Italy as independent republics (I am currently working > to improve the presentation of Engels' articles about the July 1848 > chatterbox > on the annexation of the Prussian occupied parts of Poland to Germany in the > 1848/49 Nationalversammlung in the Frankfurt Paulskirche This is a total non sequitur. You forget to take your meds today, homie? > because you try to use this simple fact as a weapon against Marx' scientific > and political legacy. lol wat? Stop hittin' the pipe, dawg. _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Capital vol 3
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * Lüko Willms wrote: > Don't indicate a vague direction, but give a concrete source. A journal > article, for example, or another publicly accessible document, with page > number > and all. The editors of MEGA: "Nicht nur die Inhalte werden diskutiert, auch die Authentizität des Textes ist bis heute strittig. Denn er fußt zwar auf Marx' Manuskript von 1864/1865, veröffentlicht in Band II/4.2, ist aber das Endprodukt eines langjährigen Redaktionsprozesses. Engels bezog neben dem „Hauptmanuskript" einige weitere Manuskripte zu Einzelfragen ein, die aus dem Zeitraum zwischen 1867/1868 und 1876 stammten und demnächst in Band II/4.3 veröffentlicht werden beziehungsweise in Band II/14 bereits vorgelegt wurden. Durch die Vermittlung der Bezüge zwischen der Druckfassung und den Manuskripten von Marx in der vorliegenden Ausgabe wird es möglich zu erkunden, inwieweit Engels den Text von Marx über das in der Druckfassung von 1894 Sichtbare hinaus veränderte, wo er eigene Akzente setzte und wie stark der Antrieb war, nicht nur als literarischer, sondern auch als politischer Nachlassverwalter zu wirken unter völlig veränderten wirtschaftlichen und politischen Rahmenbedingungen. So kann sich der Leser selbst ein Bild von der Ambivalenz machen, die Engels' Redaktion prägte: Auf der einen Seite steht sein Bestreben, die Manuskripte originalgetreu wiederzugeben, also „Marx in Marx' Worten" sprechen zu lassen, auf der anderen Seite sah sich Engels aber auch dazu legitimiert, in den Text und die Anordnung der Manuskripte einzugreifen, wenn ihm dies geboten erschien." Source: http://mega.bbaw.de/struktur/abteilung_ii/ii-15 Engels consulted later manuscripts (which will/have been published as part of MEGA), but the published text of "Volume III" is based upon the 1864/65 manuscript, with heavy editorial changes by Engels. There is also a text in English by Michael Heinrich that discusses Engels' editorial changes (which aren't really the topic of discussion here), which also mentions that the 1864/65 manuscript provides the textual material for Volume III: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1894-c3/editorial/heinrich.htm This is also discussed in greater detail by Heinrich in "The Science of Value" (English edition forthcoming from Historical Materialism/Brill) _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Capital vol 3
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * Phillip Ferguson: > What's your source for this? MEGA and its editors. This is not even a matter of dispute. This is purely banal Marxology. Unfortunately Anglophone Marx research is a few decades behind the state of things in Germany. HM/Brill is compensating for this by publishing much that attempts to make use of MEGA, and Monthly Review has published John Bellamy Foster's excellent research into Marx's investigations of natural science, but in general, there is still a tendency in the Anglosphere to not keep up with the state of MEGA or make use of it. > According to the MIA, for instance, vol 3 consists of material written by > Marx from 1863-1883. MIA does a valuable service by providing free digital access to public domain texts, but it is not an authority on anything as far as Marx philology. The claim is absolutely wrong. The manuscript that Engels edited to create a third volume of Capital is from 1864/65, and as I said, was discovered by Helena Demuth among Marx's papers after his death. > it could not have been written before vol 1 and 2 because it *brings together* Except that the manuscript was, in fact, written before both Volume I (the only actual volume of Capital in terms of actual finished manuscripts by Marx) _and_ the manuscript that constitutes the basis for "Volume II". There were _also_ manuscripts that Marx wrote between 1874-1878 that were intended for an eventual Volume III, but what Engels used for his edition of "Volume III" was the 1864/65 manuscript. > but the working out of much of the material in vol 1 comes even earlier - > 1857-8 (what became the Grundrisse). This is absurd reasoning, for numerous reasons. One, the 1857-1858 manuscript (Grundrisse der Kritik der politischen Ökonomie) is not even part of the Capital project, but of Marx's earlier, abandoned project of a six-book "Critique of Political Economy." On purely philological grounds, you are talking about a manuscript that belonged to a different project, let alone a different volume. Second, there are numerous conceptual changes that Marx made in subsequent years; for example, the distinction between abstract and concrete labour is not really present in the 1857/58 notebooks. So we're talking about discrete stages of conceptual advance throughout Marx's lifetime, which you are amalgamating into a single theoretical complex. > So, to use your logic, a chunk of vol 1 was written in 1857-8, therefore > preceding by five-six years the date you give for vol 3. No, this is not my logic at all, this is your absurd logic. See above, not only are the 1857-58 manuscripts not part of Vol. I, they are not even part of the Capital project; they are the preparatory notebooks for the 6-book plan (_not_ Capital). > You're so dogmatic about Marx having to be wrong about LTRPF Um, I haven't said a single thing about LTRPF. The only previous intervention I've made on this thread was to point out your absolutely false claim about the Volume I and the 1868-1881 manuscript preceding the 1864/65 manuscript. Perhaps you're confusing me with somebody else. I generally think the philological evidence that Michael Heinrich has given for Marx abandoning the "LTRPF" is rather convincing, but I don't feel particularly passionate about it either way, because it's neither the lynchpin of Marx's writing about crisis, nor do I regard it as a particularly fruitful or even interesting subject of debate. Self-described Marxists who advocate for the validity of LTRPF should just try, as Roberts sort of does, to muster evidence and arguments for its validity independent of textual exegesis by Marx, like, you know, how actual economists also work in the real world (and every branch of science, for that matter). (or that it isn't Marx's crisis theory) that you have got yourself in a bind re the _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Economics and Michael Roberts
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * Philip Ferguson wrote: > Where do you get the idea vol 3 was written first? Um, because it's incontrovertible fact? so-called "Volume III" = compiled from the 1864/65 Manuscript. "Volume II" = compiled from a manuscript Marx worked on continuously from 1868 to 1881. Volume I: written in 1867, revised 1872 and 1875. Furthermore, Engels wasn't even aware of the existence of the 1864/65 manusript until Helene Demuth found it while tidying up after Marx had already died. _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
