But that is crazy. Not all markets are bad ! Marx did not argue this, nor did any Marxist revolutionary who actually was involved in a successful revolution. If you did argue this, then that would imply capitalism has meant no economic progress at all in any way, which is a ridiculous and undialectical view.
I would say that this general dogma or prejudice about "markets are bad" was responsible for not a few economic disasters in the USSR and China, and it hides what the real issue is precisely about, namely exactly which property relations promote a just and efficient allocation of economic resources in the given context. It is evident that "markets" or "the market" is not a homogeneous category, but that a wide range of types of markets is possible, and that what is decisive is the property forms, ownership relations, social class relations and legal framework within which market transactions occur. In this context, Marx's own argument as I understand it is essentially (1) about the generalisation (universalisation) and overextension of markets based on bourgeois private property relations, which acquires an objective, independent, reified dynamic, causing a great deal of harm to human society, as well as developing the productive forces; (2) that a "dictatorship of the proletariat" would be able to experiment with a variety of property forms, in order to discover methods of resource allocation which fit best with social priorities - an experimentation which cannot occur in bourgeois society except in a very marginal sense; (3) that the historic objective is to supplant market allocation increasingly by direct methods of allocation which are more just, effective and efficient - methods which already anticipated in society as it exists today in many cases. The loss of this discourse in the socialist movement divides radicalism into two camps: sectarian socialists jabbering and blabbering about "reform versus revolution" without knowing what they are talking about, and applying wrongheaded critiques of social democracy, on the one hand; and Greenies who want to introduce all sorts of alternatives with a deformed view of what markets are, and how they really function in capitalist society, abstracting from the relations of social classes in so doing. If this situation continues, we might as well kiss socialism goodbye. Jurriaan ----- Original Message ----- From: "andie nachgeborenen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2003 4:42 AM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] The Road to Serfdom > You don't understand. There are two thins Michael has > forbidden on pen-l. One is rudeness. The other is > discussion of market socialism. Markets are BAD, that > is settled, leftist economists don't have to think > about that any more -- and on pen-l, they can't talk > about it. I am too tired and busy to talk about it > anymore anyway. jks
