Forwarded message: Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 29 Jan 1998 11:51:24 -0500 (EST) From: Gunder Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Michael Perelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: gunder frank replies (fwd) X-UID: 284 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Andre Gunder Frank University of Toronto 96 Asquith Ave Tel. 1 416 972-0616 Toronto, ON Fax. 1 416 972-0071 CANADA M4W 1J8 Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] My home Page is at: http://www.whc.neu.edu/whc/resrch&curric/gunder.html ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 29 Jan 1998 11:47:17 -0500 (EST) From: Gunder Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: gunder frank replies I have seen references to my posting by Louis Proyect Manjur Karim Wojtek Sokolorvsky [spelling?] - the last said it was one of three postings, none of which i saw on cm150, and that one alone was forwarded to me by a friend who got it on another net. i have seen nothing else, so my response to tbe last - perhaps based on insufficient evidence as per above - is that this objection that refers to European accomplishments and my po-mo [audience] is the result of total misunderstanding and/or misinterpretation of what i wrote, as well as perhaps of world historical reality, which -unlike pomos- i do NOT deny, but on the historical evidence review differently from the received wisdom, including that of Marx. my response to Proyect and Karim: 1. i plead guilty to not following the late Marx on this but 2. i plead innocent to mis-representing the young [and aging] Marx, particularly since 3. we were supposed to be discussing the CM which i did and not Marx's possible later doubts, and 4. i do not think that Marx's political position [which was not above criticism itself] excempts him from empirical and theoretical critique of his alleged 'science' - especially the parts that were little more than ideology, which was Euocentric, to say the least. 5. the 20th century third world writers you mention were not specifically at issue either. I would not regard them as 'eurocentric' per se, but some did inherit and use some categories from Marx and others, eg 'feudal' that were eurocentrically derived and quite inadequate to the analysis of their time and place, as indeed they were to 'medieval' Europe in the first place as well. 6. i reiterate that the snippet i posted is a 'short' piece extracted - mostly out of context - from a forthcoming book of mine, which is mostly about something else [ the global/ one world economy 1400-1800, whose very existence was denied by Marx, Weber, etc. and still is by Wallerstein] and that this book supplies abundant historical evidence to lay to rest the unfonded allegations of Sokolorvsky. 6. I would be happy to send at least a blrub about the book to anone who so requests it and 7. I would like to send it in particular to Manjur Karim, whom i thank for his kind words and whth with whom i would like to correspond bi-laterally about our mutual concerns. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Andre Gunder Frank University of Toronto 96 Asquith Ave Tel. 1 416 972-0616 Toronto, ON Fax. 1 416 972-0071 CANADA M4W 1J8 Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] My home Page is at: http://www.whc.neu.edu/whc/resrch&curric/gunder.html ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
