********************  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.
*****************************************************************

> On Apr 20, 2020, at 11:00 PM, MM <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> On Apr 20, 2020, at 10:23 PM, John Edmundson via Marxism 
>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> 
>> What I don't understand is how MMT can be simultaneously a progressive
>> approach compatible with socialism and also a good strategy for capitalist
>> survival. Mike Roberts seems to have similar misgivings. I think these may
>> have been posted here before but seem pertinent to this discussion.
> 
> The mistake you’re making is in thinking that MMT is inherently a 
> political-economic “ideology” that is trying to “compete” with “Marxism” — 
> and that therefore must be either pro-capitalist or anti-capitalist.
> 
> Do you believe the same of chemistry? Biology? Physics? Math? 
> 
> This is the mistake that Michael Roberts makes, and it’s what makes his 
> “critique” essentially worthless.
> 
> None of this will make any sense if you’re not willing to read the source 
> literature. 

“I have not yet been persuaded that the study of physics is inherently 
anti-capitalist, and therefore I refuse to make any serious effort to 
understand physics.”

Maybe the stakes get clearer when we put the argument that way.
_________________________________________________________
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

Reply via email to