Robert Naiman <[email protected]> wrote: > I wondered if you'd come back, since you started this thread. > > Not only do we disagree, we disagree about what we disagree about. > > I have no problem with you going on about capitalism and the labor theory of > value and the transformation problem all you want.
What crap! I haven't talked about the "labor theory of value" (or the transformation problem) in a long time. The last time I did anything close to that was when I argued against Shane's view that the rate of profit necessarily falls under capitalism. I also don't know why Robert equates those topics to an understanding of the socioeconomic balance of power. All I can think is that it's a form of political dyslexia, seeing anyone who disagrees with the official Line as being obsessed with arcana. > Where we come into conflict is your insistence that this is the only form of > acceptable political activity: engagement in real-world politics is > forbidden. Again, Robert claims to know my political views much better than I do. What utter arrogance! (To make things worse, Robert reads my mind incorrectly.) now, this is _really is_ the end for the day. (It's like the time a Catholic relative thought that I was a fan of the Ayatollahs because I gave him a magazine (the NATION, by the way) which criticized the Pope.) -- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
