I'm aware of Chomsky's position,, and it is not at all what I'm remembering from Sweezy. Chomsky virtually denied that there can be any systematic knowledge of the workings of any social relations.
Carrol -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Gar Lipow Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2015 10:54 PM To: Progressive Economics Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Query on Sweezy I don't remember Sweezy on this, but Chomsky has made this point often. I think Chomsky deprecates the role of experts too much on occasion; something need not be a science to include roles that require expertise, but that is another issue and part of why I have drifted further away from anarchism, and closer to Marxism. On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 7:05 PM, Carrol Cox <[email protected]> wrote: Sometime in the last 40 years Paul Sweezy wrote an article in which he explained why socialism could not be a science. He argued that whatever else socialism was, it had to be a democracy. But science is the realm of expertise, and to hold that socialism was a science was to deny the one essential feature of socialism. I don't remember the date or the title of the article, and Sweezy made the point rather better than I am making it here. Can anyone identify the source. Carrol _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l -- Facebook: Gar Lipow Twitter: GarLipow Solving the Climate Crisis web page: SolvingTheClimateCrisis.com Grist Blog: http://grist.org/author/gar-lipow/ Online technical reference: http://www.nohairshirts.com _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
