I think there is more advanced argument to be made against market socialism. If Justin has not been exiled from the list I would like a chance to make it in argument against the market socialists.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I would agree with Jim. While Michael may feel that the issue has > been debated sufficiently, I am somewhat disturbed by the > superficial analysis of market socialism that passes for critical > thought on this list. As someone who has worked for the past 15 > years in Jugoslavia and, most intensively, in Slovenia, I am > dismayed by the level of discourse on workers' self-management, > labour based economies, Jugoslav economic history, the theory > and practice of market socialism etc. Quite frankly, I would not > accept what is presented on this list at a second year level. I think > Justin may well be encouraged to drop the subject , but not > because he is going over old ground, but because it appears that > everyone's mind is made up and they have no intention of being > influenced by fact or argument.If anyone seriously wants to debate > the theory of market socialism I think they should look at the basic > literature. At risk of appearing arrogant on this, one place they > might begin is my and Jim Stoddard's contribution on market > socialism to the Encyclopedia of Political Economy. But please, > the level of debate so far is hardly complimentary to the list. > > Paul Phillips, > Economics, > University of Manitoba > > >>I agree with Christian. I do not see any reason to restrict Justin's >>contributions, .... I think the main job of the moderator is not to >>restrict the content of discussion but the tone (avoiding flame-wars and the >>like). >> >> > > >>Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine >> >> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >>>Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 10:52 AM >>>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>Subject: [PEN-L:27920] Re: Repitition and Market Socialism >>> >>> >>> >>>>Here's my suggestion for Justin. Let's stipulate that >>>> >>>everything you said so >>>far is true. Do you have anything to add -- something that you >>>have not already said? If not, the discussion is finished. >>>If you have >>>something new to add, let's hear it.< >>> >>>This is pathetic, Michael. Having been on this list for a few >>>years, I can >>>only think of a few instances in which people have really >>>"moved conversations >>>along," on this standard. Besides, so what if debates don't >>>generate anything >>>new for you? Isn't possible that people _learn_ through >>>repetition? The >>>members of this list have talked almost incessantly about >>>"the current crisis" >>>or whatever for at least the last 4 years, and yet you can >>>never seem to get >>>enough of that. My point is not that this isn't >>>worthwhile--just the opposite. >>>But it's true for Justin, too. If people weren't really >>>interested, they just >>>wouldn't bother. Give the list some credit. >>> >>>Christian >>> >>> > >
