discuss H&N and everything else which comes up here.
I read the terms of the H&N debate between Nathan and Yoshie, and I remember
the H&N debate between Doug and Yoshie on LBO-Talk, and as much as I find
Nathan's and Doug's take on the 'empire' thesis more compelling than
Yoshie's, she is making real arguments, and her points must be taken
seriously. For example, I agree, although she and I would probably take the
insight in different directions, that there is a neglect of the state in H&N.
That is different than playing games with the number of times an index
identifies abstract concepts in the text -- a task which, after all, is what
indexes are generally supposed to do.
Moreover, contentions that a book doesn't discuss this topic or that topic
tend to be, with very few exceptions, complete 'red herrings.' It is only
germane when the topic is clearly central to the book's theme. The fact that H
&N have nothing to say about NATO is not exactly a piercing critique.
Some may think that it is because I am in the thrall of "post" thought, but I
don't think that I or anyonje else has these questions all figured out, and
that all we need to do is to apply the science of Marxism which we possess to
every question that comes along. Frankly, I find that pose "prophetic" if not
downright "messianic": "I am here to save the masses from the errors of wrong
thinking." Rather, I like to think of this listservs, when they work, as
"thinking together" so we might learn from each other what none of us could
manage on our own. But that sort of dialogue requires a basic intellectual
humility, and some abstinence from the considerable intellectual hubris we
are frequently dished out. I think Doug has the approach to H&N right: if it
is a productive text, that allows us to think about some burning questions in
some new ways, then it is more than worthy of engagement, whatever its
shortcomings.
<< Leo, I understand that you have read Karl Marx. However, the question
before us is whether you have read "Empire". Without having Henwood's article
on "Empire" in front of me last night, I made a point that references to IMF,
the World Bank and NATO were conspicuously absent -- a point that Henwood,
supposedly whose existence on this planet governs everything I write, seems
to agree with. When you are ready to discuss "Empire" send me a signal, like
putting a code word in the subject heading of your post. "Mishegoyim" or
"Shmeggegy" might do. >>
Leo Casey
United Federation of Teachers
260 Park Avenue South
New York, New York 10010-7272 (212-598-6869)
Power concedes nothing without a demand.
It never has, and it never will.
If there is no struggle, there is no progress.
Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet deprecate agitation are men who
want crops without plowing the ground. They want rain without thunder and
lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its waters.
-- Frederick Douglass --
