CB and WB
Dialectics!
The principle of self-regulation of production that is basic to the
capitalist mode of production militates against the fettering of the
development of productive forces.
The limitations of the expanding absolute surplus value (lengthening the
work day and reducing
Emmanuel Todd's comments excerpted here might be said to characterize U.S.
domestic industrial decline as property relations fettering development of
the material productive forces. The Katrina phenomenon might be a microcosm
of the larger U.S. system. The trend in U.S. property relations is to
An epoch of social revolution was in fact indisputably completing itself
world wide and no one disputes that this was the Industrial Social
Revolution of
which Marx wrote and called for the communists and proletarians to place
themselves at the head of the process.
CB: How you gonna say
Re : Re: Graham Priest: dialectic dialetheic (Ian Hunt)
From: Ian Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Graham Priest: dialectic dialetheic
Dear Ralph,
I wonder what the purpose of your review is? We could surely do
without the abuse (Priest and Sayers are 'philistines'
WL: I reiterate:
1. No capitalist can afford to fetter the development of the forces of
production without going down. Marx made the point that in order just to
maintain a stable rate of profit capitalist enterprises must at very least
conform to the general state of development of the
In a message dated 9/15/2005 1:57:04 PM Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
CB: How you gonna say with a straight face that the Industrial Revolution
was the Industrial Social Revolution, or that Marx treated it as a social
revolution ?
:)
Comment
Obviously you are joking. The
1. No capitalist can afford to fetter the development of the forces of
production without going down. Marx made the point that in order just to
maintain a stable rate of profit capitalist enterprises must at very least
conform to the general state of development of the means of production and
Dear Ralph,
Now I see your point - it was not clear before. (BTW In
Contradiction is earlier - the science and society article is based
on it but it does spell out more completely his argument). I agree
with you that Graham Priest's interest is primarily with logic and
ways in which we
You are assuming of course that we know how or what kinds of productive
forces WILL prevail in communist society.
If you take your model of the communist mode of production from the late and
mostly unlamented People's Democratic Republics and Soviets as well as from
the various more
I am a little puzzled here. See below:
At 12:11 PM 9/16/2005 +1000, Ian Hunt wrote:
Dear Ralph,
Now I see your point - it was not clear before. (BTW In
Contradiction is earlier - the science and society article is based
on it but it does spell out more completely his argument). I agree
with
10 matches
Mail list logo
