Gene Coyle
Doyle Saylor wrote:
Greetings Economists, Gene Coyle writes to Carrol, Carrol, I was talking of "blowback," not the overthrow of capitalism. Kenya, Bali, and ... wherever is next seems to me evidence of blowback.Gene Coyle Doyle The point that Carrol made is still the same. You say that the unforeseen consequences for Capitalists is the blowback. And that is stupid since it is obvious to someone who is anti-capitalist that things don't go according to so-called planning for them. You have a cognitive theory of smart and insightful that says if you are smart you will see the truth i.e. blowback and will then not be a Capitalist. That doesn't work as a political strategy. Huge societies can be formed like the former Soviet Union in which the social norm is to reject Capitalist methods, and yet 'stupid' as the U.S. capitalist are they pulled the Soviet Union down. So the cognitive part of your analysis is not working. In fact I would simply say about blowback that it says that what Capitalism claims works doesn't work for ordinary working class people. But any sort of theory that rests upon saying they are stupid because what they say is supposed to work doesn't is not appropriate. Understanding how minds work is both key to a major part of creating a socialist society, and that for the most part terms like stupid are simply folk psychology's of how one might understand ordinary human interchange of information. You elide the point by trying to say Carrol misunderstands you not talking about the overthrow of Capitalism. This is all I have to say about this. In order to address this in a serious vein it can't be you said this I said that, it has to be an attempt to make depth to any point. There is nothing about what you said that refutes Carrol's point at all, but if you can take this up and demonstrate that stupid means something in a serious manner go for it. thanks, Doyle Saylor
