******************** 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. *****************************************************************
Shalva wrote: "I can't say that I've read much of Michael Roberts' non-blog work (or that of the other new prophets of "the tendency" like Carchedi and Kliman), but I have to agree with the old RPE critique (explicated best in Howard Sherman's work) of their intellectual forefathers that "the tendency" is a technologically determinant view of capitalism that leaves little to no room for the political." Marx's entire life's work is premised on the fact that workers have the capacity to organise to replace capitalism. Given that reality, that some Marxists feel the need to claim that the LTRPF "leaves little to no room for the political" is slightly odd. If it were an inflexible "technologically determinant view of capitalism", it would have either been objectively disproved or we would be on an inexorable and rapid path toward the overthrow of capitalism and the establishment of communism. Instead, the 'LTRPF' is quite clearly described as just that, a *tendency*, and subject to many countervailing forces, which makes for a fluid and unpredictable world. It is precisely within that fluidity and unpredictability that the "room for the political" exists. Certainly there have been Marxists in the past, and I am sure there are some today, who see these things in mechanistic and inevitable, rather than dynamic and dialectical ways. That such people and views exist does not disprove the LTRPF. Cheers, John _________________________________________________________ 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
