On Fri, 28 Jul 1995, Tom Walker wrote: > Louis Proyect is correct. I most certainly *do* exclude revolution as an > economic policy option. If my understanding of the term is adequate > "revolution" is a metaphor for profound social and political change. > > It may very well be that we "need" a revolution, as Proyect seems to claim. > But there is a long, long road from prescribing a revolution to having one. > We make the road by walking. > Louis Proyect: Isn't odd that with Newt Gingrich describing himself as a "revolutionary", thousands of seemingly ordinary Americans organizing themselves into militias against what they perceive to be as an "oppressive" government, and a generally pervasive mood of crisis, that some "progressive economists" won't even entertain this possibility intellectually. I would maintain that at the rate things are going, within 10 to 20 years nothing except revolution will appear reasonable.
