>From: Carrol Cox >

It is going to be hard for marxists and you to find common ground.

Yes that seems obvious, since by marxist definition the only place where 
common ground may be found is within "the movement". I've asked Tony to scan 
my party card and send it via email. Since I have pretty much just been 
arguing the status quo as a way to get at a discussion of the "crash", I 
have no great attachment to any perceived political ideologies. Move over, 
Comrade, and hand me that vodka! Is there a secret handshake?


Regardless of
>whether the Protestant Ethic is or is not linked to capitalism, this 
>argument is
>false because it jams together quite different things.

Nah. Regardless of how you define Protestant Ethic and what you think it is, 
and regardless of how you define capitalism (and provide yet one more 
definition for it,) both of them are engines that drive US policy. Keep 
living in denial of it as you wish. If the only ways you can reconcile other 
factors than nasty old capitalism as influencing US policy is to either 
redefine them to suit your ideology or link them to a marxist paradigm, by 
all means do so. Frankly, I tire of the word games.


>And I can't for the life of me grasp what you mean in this phrase by 
>"theory of
>capitalism." Is there such a thing?

No. You are correct. There never was a theory of capitalism. Go back to 
sleep.

>Capitalism was already a triumphant system,
>on the verge of conquering the earth, when someone first called it 
>capitalism.
>Capitalism, the mode of production characterized by a huge complex set of 
>social
>relations, came well before any "theory" of it developed. (Quesnay, Smith, 
>and
>Ricardo didn't know they were developing capitalist theory, incidentally.)

Thank you for another definition. It will go in the notebook. Does everyone 
agree with Carrol?

>Is there such a thing as the Protestant Ethic? These
>various "ethics" that go bruited about beginning in the late 19th century 
>(when
>did "work ethic" get coined) have always seemed to me to be excellent 
>examples
>of the tendency to mistake a description of what needs to be explained for 
>such
>an explanation.
>
>Carrol

Apparently Tahir thinks that Weber linked it to capitalism, so it prolly 
exists as some as-yet-defined part of the hated machine.  But go ahead and 
belittle the term, Carrol, dismiss it out of hand, make it go away. Ignore 
it. It has nothing to do with anything important in the box that is your 
universe. Some people once upon a time imagined "the Protestant Ethic" was 
both a way to insult Americans and to describe their naive behavior upon the 
world stage. They were wrong.

Tom
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.


_______________________________________________
Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist

Reply via email to