I do not disagree with the moderator's interruption of the debate regarding the Brenner thesis.. I do mean "interruption" as I am sure the issue will arise again and in the not too distant future.
It was clear that near the end, the issues were carrying a little bit more than just "the issues," which is why the moderator was absolutely correct in calling for a clarification of what the issues are. For what it's worth, the significance of this debate has more than one dimension. There is a critical question of understanding how capitalism is in fact different-- the difference between wealth and value, between possession and accumulaton. And I think there's another issue here, one that makes the debate a stalking horse for the debate that has continued throughout the post WW2 era. After Brenner published his critique of the neo-Smithians, the disagreements were really about where the revolutionary plexus in capitalism exists today-- the "third world" vs. "advanced capitalism" debate, and the criticality, irreducible reliance, past and present, of capitalist reproduction upon "empire," "primitive accumulation," non-class specific exploitation. If the discussion is worth continuing, then it can and will certainly survive a modest break; then it is important that it become more than just dms vs lp.
