[PEN-L:11441] Re: Millennium takes a short cut?
> Has a volte-face truly occurred at the World Bank ... ? Maybe the Guardian was being sardonic. You can find a summary of the 97 WDR at http://www.worldbank.org/html/extpb/wdr97/english/wdr97su1.htm I'd say it's at most a lane change, certainly not a U-turn. The World Bank has just begun a charm offensive toward NGOs, which may explain the more populist language in this latest WDR. How excited you get about a slightly more social-democratic flavor of neoliberalism I guess depends on where you stand and/or start from. There are worse things. It has become clearer to the IMF and World Bank in the last few years that capitalism doesn't just spring into existence if you get rid of state intervention; rather you're apt to end up with primitive accumulation by various mafias. (See, along these lines, an amusing memoir in the Aug 97 Harper's about USAID's promotion of privatization in Kazakhstan.) Hence the particular emphasis on a property-defending legal system, which is what Stiglitz seems to be talking about when he calls for "appropriate institutional foundations for markets." Best, Colin
[PEN-L:11440] Millennium takes a short cut?
> This report caused amazingly little stir when it hit the FutureWork list 16 days ago, and I'm pretty sure that no variant of it arrived here. Has a volte-face truly occurred at the World Bank, much less one of astonishing proportions? Any thoughts, anyone? valis Occupied America From: "vivian Hutchinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Ian Ritchie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 10:53:10 + Subject: World Bank in surprise policy U-turn Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] from The Guardian Weekly Volume 157 Issue 1 for week ending July 6, 1997, Page 19 World Bank in surprise policy U-turn Charlotte Denny IN an astonishing volte-face, the World Bank in Washington has abandoned its long-running support for minimal government in favour of a new model based on a strong and vigorous state. Its latest report on world development*, published last week, calls for "reinvigoration of public institutions" and says the role of government has been vital in making possible the "dazzling growth" of East Asia. "An 'effective state' is the cornerstone of successful economies; without it, economic and social development is impossible," says the report. "Good government is not a luxury [but] a vital necessity for development." The bank says an effective state "harnesses the energy of private business and individuals, and acts as their partner and catalyst, instead of restricting their partnership". With the collapse of the communist economies and the crisis in welfare spending in the industrial world, the role of the state is in the spotlight around the globe, it adds. "For many, the lesson of recent years has been that the state could not deliver on its promise," said the bank's president, James Wolfensohn. "Many have felt that the logical endpoint of all of this was the minimalist state. The report explains why this extreme view is at odds with the evidence of the world's development success stories." But the bank itself has been identified with policies that have seen developing nations cut essential government services to try to balance their books. Aid recipients must meet stringent budget targets under its structural adjustment policies. The bank now says that building an effective state is vital for development. It lists key tasks of government as including investing in basic social services and infrastructure, providing a welfare safety net, protecting the environme! nt and establishing a foundation of law. Chief economist Joseph Stiglitz said the bank now believed markets and governments were complementary. "The state is essential for putting in place the appropriate institutional foundations for markets," he said. The irony of this U-turn was not lost on many of the bank's critics. The International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) said the bank had toured the globe during the 1980s recommending the paring down of government, the civil service, education and health services in the developing world. Bill Jordan, leader of the Brussels-based ICFTU, welcomed the change of heart, but he added: "I regret that public institutions, public morale and essential services like health and education had first to be considerably eroded before the World Bank could come round to its current view." For its report, the bank surveyed businesspeople around the world and found that the countries that scored low marks for government effectiveness also suffered from low growth. "Many countries lack the basic institutional foundations for markets to grow," the report says. Corruption and crime emerged as serious problems. The bank found countries with high levels of corruption had low investment and growth. The report says the consequences of bribery do not end with paying off the officials and then getting on with business: "Government arbitrariness entangles firms in a web of time-consuming and economically wasteful negotiations." *The State in a Changing World; The World Development Report, 1997 (The World Bank) vivian Hutchinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone 06-753-4434 fax 06-759-4648 P.O.Box 428 New Plymouth, Taranaki, New Zealand visit The Jobs Research Website at http://www.jobsletter.org.nz/
[PEN-L:11439] Re: Male Chauvanist Math
In a message dated 97-07-24 02:01:53 EDT, you write: << 1. Marx tended to minimize concerns for the immediate adverse impact of capitalism on women and children because he focused on what he believed to be the inherent impact of capitalism dynamics in the long run on their situatio >> Bob, Read the stuff on the working day - hardly a concern with LR dynamics! Also, my sister was a math major at Queens College in the early 1970's. On the first day of a Differential Calculus class, the prof turned to my sister (and the 3 other female students) and said, "what are you doing here? your never going to need this stuff while your raising your kids!!" More to the point: The use of econometrics in is to emphasize central tendencies and often long run tendencies. This "makes sense" if one can ignore the immediate situation or the deviations from the central tendencies. I work for an insurance company and do econometric forecasting/research. I don't consider myself an "econometrician" but I know how to use the tools. The strenghts of econometrics are also its weaknesses (which neither radicals nor NCs nor others who use the stuff pay attention to): its a flexible set of tools that are capable of giving "soft" and "hard" results. For example, when I want to establish "credibility" in a rate trend, I can use a host of techniques. The point is that math, stats, and other quant techniques are systems of knowledge that are made to be manipulated (but also need to be understood). Unfortunately, I'm not paid to be concerned with "long run central tendencies," rather I need to get a short run projection for a defined objective. Finally, I object to the characterization of my wife as the "Willie Mays" of hospital accounting: Mays had to endure overt racisim from a crowd of people that was in his face everyday. My wife's situation - while difficult - was no where near as traumatic (even though in the beginning of her career she regularly worked 80 hour weeks) Jason
[PEN-L:11438] Addendum--Cognitive Dissonance
I apologize for this addendum but I was interrupted before all of my thoughts on "mathematics and formalism" were finished. To the previous list of some factors leading to bankrupt as opposed to progressive mathematics and "formalism", we might add "congnitive dissonance." When there is a contradiction between fact and belief or between belief and emotion or between emotion and fact supposedly a certain mentally de-stabilizing "dissonance" ensues. Take for example an academic who deep in his/her own heart believes that much of "mainstream" economics--particularly the neoclassical stuff--is inherently bankrupt in terms of content and application. This mytical academic however, is dedicated to "infiltrating the system, getting tenure and then coming out of the "closet" metaphorically speaking". To get into and remain within the "right" academic circles, often to survive graduate school, to be hired at the "right" schools and then to survive to get tenure, often his/her CV has to have publications dealing with the "permissible" subjects, utilizing the "permissible" theoretical approaches, utilizing the "right" state-of-the-art techniques (even if totally mis-applied) and published in the "right" journals and/or delivered to the "right" conferences thus yielding approval from the "right" authorities and "grand masters" of "the profession." So now this mythical academic does all of this and successfully infiltrates or even comes to a realization after tenure that his/her previous work was crap. How to handle the congnitive dissonance: you thought you had "the truth" then, and now you say you have "the truth" how do you know you won't find another "the truth"; or, your CV is full of neoclassical stuff which you now say is crap, does that mean you were whoring and deceptive all along or does it mean that you have simply found a new more trendier "market niche" in which to continue to "publish-or-perish". Then of course there is the problem of when do you come out of the ideological closet. Even after tenure, there is still the problem of promotions, class assignments, grants etc and the usual rules apply: "right" perspective on the "right" topics utilizing the "right" methodologies in the service of the "right" masters in the "right" media... I suspect the realities and imperatives of imperial academia also have something to do with the more bankrupt versions/uses of mathematics and formalism. Jim Craven *--* * James Craven * " The philosophers have only * * Dept of Economics* interpreted the world in various * * Clark College* ways; the point, however, is to * * 1800 E. Mc Loughlin Blvd.* change it." (Karl Marx) * * Vancouver, Wa. 98663 * * * (360) 992-2283 * * * [EMAIL PROTECTED]* * * MY EMPLOYER HAS NO ASSOCIATION WITH MY PRIVATE/PROTECTED OPINION *
[PEN-L:11437] FWD: Oct. '97 End Corporate Dominance month
===Forwarded Message== >Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Date: Tue, 22 Jul 1997 13:12:39 -0500 >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >From: entropy haus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Oct. '97 End Corporate Dominance month >X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.0 -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN > >OCTOBER, 1997 >END CORPORATE DOMINANCE MONTH >INTERNATIONAL DAYS OF ACTION > > > It has the world's resources at it's disposal. It gobbles whole mountains >and forests, drinks rivers dry, spews toxic waste, and enslaves whole >populations. It has all the rights of a citizen, but few of the >limitations. It can cross national borders as if they were cobwebs. It is >immortal, and can therefore amass wealth and power beyond the capabilities >of mere mortals. It has powers that dwarf and control governments. It >controls the newspapers, radio, and television, and so it controls the >"truth." It controls humans' access to food, water, shelter, employment, >and energy. If humans struggle against its tyranny, it buys them out or >knocks them down with lawsuits, firings, harassment, and if necessary, murder. > Are we talking about some sort of selfish, ill-tempered GOD??? > In a way, we are. We are talking about the CORPORATION. > Why do we allow an inanimate thing, just an idea really, to have so much >power over our lives and the fate of the entire planet? > People created corporations with ideas, words and laws, but the creation >has turned into a MONSTER. Many of us believe that it is now time to end >the monster's reign of terror, and that with a different set of ideas, >words, and laws, we can kill the monster, or at least put it in a good >strong cage. > This is what the campaign to END CORPORATE DOMINANCE is about. Whether you >are an environmentalist, a labor activist, a human rights campaigner, a >campaign finance reformer, or any citizen in a dispute with an insurance >company, bank, etc., your ideas, words, and actions can become a part of this >campaign. The key is to make our efforts directed to the root of the >problem, not just the symptoms. > Nobody has illusions that this battle will be easy. We just know that the >time to begin has come.Already, countless organizations are doing the work. >People of all these movements are joining forces, and they are demanding >that corporations release their control over the Earth and all its >inhabitants. > >MONTH OF ACTION > > October 1997 was selected as a month of action against corporations at the >Earth First! Round River Rendezvous in July. Across the world, groups will >be planning demonstrations targeting their least favorite corporate >plunderer. Whether your group chooses MAXXAM, Shell, Nike, Mitsubishi, >Exxon, or Champion, whether your site is the corporate headquarters, a >neighborhood toxic dump or the CEO's private residence, corporations around >the world will feel our united rage! While Earth First! is promoting and >coordinating October ECD actions, any and all groups who struggle against >corporations are encouraged to organize their events in whatever style >suits them best. > If your group wants to participate in the INTERNATIONAL MONTH OF ACTION TO >END CORPORATE DOMINANCE, please contact the EF! End Corporate Dominance >Campaign ASAP. Begin organizing your demo TODAY! To make this a coordinated >campaign, and for effective media notification, we would like to know a >little bit about each of our chosen targets. Please send a copy of your >media notice >(a rough draft is fine) ASAP, and we will forward the list to each >participant for use at the protests. Lets be BOLD, CREATIVE and >UNCOMPROMISING! > These protests will not be taking place in a vacuum. The challenge to >corporate dominance is coming from all over the world, from labor, human >rights, indigenous resistance, peace, social justice, and environmental >movements. In the US, teach-ins focusing on Corporations, Education and >Democracy will be taking place globally during the first week of >March,1998. Last year, dozens of demonstrations took place all over the >world on End Corporate Dominance Day, October 29th. This year we are giving >ourselves more flexibility and including quite a few other anti-corporate >days of action (such as Dia de la Raza/Columbus day and the McLibel >campaign's Mcdonalds boycott/protest day) by declaring the whole month of >October as End Corporate Dominance month. We are not alone, and our actions >will reinforce each other's campaigns, if we act promptly. LETS GET WITH IT! > >Earth First! End Corporate Dominance Campaign >c/o EF! Austin P.O.Box 7292 Austin, TX 78713 (512) 320-0413 ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >(insert your group's name, contact, address, phone, and/or email here) > > -
[PEN-L:11436] FW: BLS Daily Report
>BLS DAILY REPORT, WEDNESDAY, JULY 23, 1997 > >RELEASED TODAY: Sixty-five percent of 1996 high school graduates were >attending colleges or universities by the fall. This rate was an all-time >high. From 1992 to 1995, the enrollment rate was about 62 percent Nearly >two-thirds of the 1996 high school graduates who were freshmen in college >were enrolled in four-year institutions. About two-fifths of them were >combining school with some labor force activity. In contrast, a much higher >proportion (about three-fifths) of the youth enrolled in two-year colleges >were in the labor force. The labor force participation rate was 78.1 percent >among the high school graduates who did not enroll in college in the fall of >1996 > >After adjustment for inflation, the weekly median earnings of the nation's >full-time wage and salary workers climbs 0.4 percent during the second >quarter compared with a year earlier, according to BLS (Daily Labor >Report, page D-1). > >New GDP numbers may well solve some major riddles The Commerce Department >will release revised numbers next week that may show the economy has been >forging ahead even faster than thought, adding almost a full percentage point >to growth for the past two years On the one hand, faster growth would >help solve some maddening economic puzzles. The biggest one: Why inflation >has stayed so tame despite extremely low unemployment levels. But for >practical reasons, there's little reason to get excited. Just because the >economy has been growing faster doesn't mean it's in any more danger of >fueling inflation Probably most important, it would show that >productivity hasn't been as sorry as it has appeared during the past few >years If productivity is revised upward, then unit labor costs would be >reduced. Probably, labor costs would be more consistent with inflation >(Wall Street Journal, page A2). > >New IRS statistics break down how much income individual taxpayers had to >report for 1994 in order to rank in various income groups in the IRS's >Statistics of Income Bulletin (Wall Street Journal, "Tax Report," page >A1). > >Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, calling the U.S. economic >performance "exceptional and better than most anticipated," said that growth >has "moderated" for now, but cautioned that at some point the central bank >will have to raise interest rates to keep inflation in check (Daily Labor >Report, page A-12)_Greenspan expects a strong economy through 1998. His >testimony to House panel fuels stock and bond markets' surge Greenspan >cited several factors that may have contributed to allowing the nation to >have a low 5 percent jobless rate without triggering large enough wage gains >to add to inflation. On his long list were technological improvements, >deregulation of a number of industries, a surge in business investment that >has boosted production capacity and productivity, a heightened sense of job >insecurity among workers, a strong dollar that has lowered the cost of >imported goods and services, changes that have reduced health care costs, and >"the reduced market power of labor unions." "Many of the forces are limited >or temporary, and their effects can be expected to diminish, at which time >cost and price pressures would tend to re-emerge," he warned. But some of >the changes, particularly technological developments, may have a more >permanent impact The true constraint on the economy, he told the >committee, is that the nation does not have enough people who don't have jobs >to allow employment to continue to rise as rapidly as it has since the end of >the 1990-91 recession "The unemployment rate has a downside limit if for >no other reason than unemployment, in part, reflects voluntary periods of job >search and other frictional unemployment," he said (Washington Post, page >A1)_Greenspan suggested that the central bank was inclined to leave >interest rates steady for the time being, but he issued a gentle warning that >the current combination of steady growth, low unemployment, and nonexistent >inflation would not continue indefinitely His generally upbeat assessment >of the economy dispersed lingering anxieties among investors that the Fed >would raise rates next month, and the stock market soared in response >(New York Times, page A1)_Greenspan gave no hint that an increase in >interest rates is imminent, buoying the financial markets. He hailed the >current state of the economy as "exceptional," said the U.S. has "as close to >stable prices as I've seen since the 1960s," and welcomed the recent slowing >of economic growth (Wall Street Journal, page A2). > >Growing numbers of employers are using managed health care to cut costs and >keep employees healthy and productive, according to the management consulting >firm Hewitt Associates. Of 1,050 employers surveyed, 89 percent had some >sort of managed health initiative in
[PEN-L:11435] Mathematics and Formalism
I think it was Heilbroner who was quoted as saying something like "mathematics has brought to economics rigor--and alas, also mortis." No doubt that many of the formalistic models, analytical approaches, epistemological foundations and gross misuses of mathematics in "mainstream" economics serve to divert attention away from, ratify, legitimate, mystify some of the essential and very ugly realities and dynamics of capitalism. The problem is not mathematics or even abstraction or even model- building or even some formalism per se, the problem has to do with what exactly is being modeled, on what basis, looking through what analytical prisms and with what tests of verification/nullification. When I taught in Kerala at a hundred-year-old Catholic University, the Government of Kerala was Communist Party--Marxist. One of the initiatives in which I was involved at a very minor level had to do with re-examining and restructuring some of the approaches/data bases/data categories etc used in the limited planning going on. I remember once asking the class "What is the present going price of a Kg of Rice?", "What is the present typical wage of a field worker and how many days of the year does a typical field worker worker?", "What is the typical wage of a local lorry driver?", "What percentage of a typical graduating class of engineers or doctors are women?" To all of these and other questions no answer was given. The students were being given some "book knwledge", but most of them (20% of the class seats are reserved for "Scheduled Caste") were urban-based, from middle-class or wealthy families, had jobs lined up prior to graduation (many in family businesses) and were from families with servants who did the buying at market. At the Center for Development Studies in Trivanndrum we had long discussions about centralized vs de-centralized planning and the need for not only more comprehensive and more accurate data bases (garbage in, garbage out) but also for the need for new "categories" and new instruments for more clearly and more concretely assessing aspects of the realities faced by the many. I suggested also that perhaps the curriculum could be revised with an internship/thesis requirement such that for example, engineering students would be required to actually participate in building something in an area of need or that medical students be required to work in rural areas in need etc. Further, we suggested that the data systems be revamped in terms of who was reporting the data (imperial data collecters descending on the villages in their clean white mundas vs the people who do the activities being measured and quantified). The villagers also had a distrust of the imperial data collectors and urban people in general because every time they provided data or participated in aspects of the planning process, their inputs were used to screw them. Television was just being introduced in Kerala in 1983; people in the villages had literally never seen a TV prior to that (except the few who had worked in the Gulf or visited relatives in Bombay) and I suggested that they had a golden opportunity to set up systems to assess and monitor the impact of TV in terms of programming content, voting patterns, changing tastes, study habits of the children, family cohesion, changing structures of aggregate demand and supply, religous expression, exacerbating/decreasing tribalism and inter/intra religious feuds, attitudes/violence toward women, changing attitudes on sexuality, rural to urban demographic movements, etc. I noted with respect to the introduction of Western programming "Be Careful of what you wish for, you just might get it." I also noted that they might want to monitor the specific content of foreign programming for examples of attempting "social systems engineering" from the outside. The point is that it is not enough to decry the categories and analytical approaches and formalism that obscure/ratify/legitimate/reproduce some ugly realities, we have to ask why, in addition to the usual reasons, the "mainstream approaches" continue even when their bankruptcy is clear. Part of the problem has to do with imperial academia, removed from the realities that are offen modeled and written about (even sympathetically) using "official data" because that is easier to find and use. Another part of the problem as to do with the "publish-or-perish" imperatives of "success" in academia leading to the rush to get anything out even if it is crap--albeit "elegantly quantified" crap. Another part of the problem is the backgrounds of those who do the research (often they went from high-school to college to grad school to teaching with no real experience with the realities they are purporting to "study" and "research". Another part of the problem is careerism in academia and this notion: "we'll I'll play the game, get into the system, get tenure and then the real me
[PEN-L:11434] FW: BLS Daily Report
>BLS DAILY REPORT, TUESDAY, JULY 22, 1997 > >RELEASED TODAY: Median weekly earnings of the nation's 93.4 million >full-time wage and salary workers were $499 in the second quarter of 1997. >This was 2.7 percent higher than a year earlier, compared with a gain of 2.3 >percent in the CPI-U over the same period > >Inflation, believed in terminal condition, could soon emerge from its deep >sleep, writes Peter Passell in the New York Times (page A1). While hardly >anybody is predicting apocalypse soon, there is reason to believe that >unemployment is already below the rate consistent with price stability, >according to Passell Robert Gordon, a specialist on inflation at >Northwestern University, warned, for example, that wage increases are being >disguised as promotions. "It will take at least a year to see it happening," >he said. Inflation's prospects are also being bolstered by the likely end to >the set of conditions that have helped hold it in check, such as the low >price of oil and the strong dollar, which has kept imports inexpensive > >Eroding customer service -- blamed in the past on layoffs and cost-cutting >efforts -- has been getting even worse in a time of low unemployment. In >many areas, companies either go short-staffed or hire less-qualified workers, >says USA Today (page 1B) A companion story reports that the tight labor >market has companies scrambling to find employees, sometimes canvassing >junior high schools for future workers > >Wage gains remain at 3 percent across all industries under contracts >negotiated in the first six months of 1997, the same as that negotiated >during the first six months of 1996, according to data compiled by BNA >(Daily Labor Report, page D-1). > >DUE OUT TOMORROW: College Enrollment and Work Activity of 1996 High School >Graduates >
[PEN-L:11433] Re: Intuition in Math Reasoning: Keynes & JM Clark
In a 1941 letter to J.M. Clark, Keynes wrote: "As you will have gathered the other evening, I agree with what you say about the danger of a 'school,' even when it is one's own. There is great danger in quantitative forecasts which are based exclusively on statistics relating to conditions by no means parallel. I have tried to persuade Gilbert and Humphrey and Salant that they should be more cautious. I have also tried to persuade them that they have tended to neglect certain theoretical considerations which are important, in the interests of simplifying their statistical task." In Dec. 1941, before the AEA, J.M. Clark said: "Among other things, we appear to be in for a period of government by statistics and econometrics. This is little better than chartless fumbling with essentially quantitative [qualitative?] problems; ... There is real danger that, in certain sectors, government's immediate objective will be not a realistic picture of the lives of its citizens but figures in tables or lines on charts which leave out vital imponderables and are not even accurate as figures." Larry Shute Thanks for your message at 02:56 AM 7/23/97 -0700, romain_kroes. Your message was: >It's relevant that Keynes doesn't condemn, here, the use of mathematics >in economics (as for him, he rather liked to have recourse to them up to >tautology), but that he implicitly accuses the lack of a conceptual >basis in economics, so much so that "the back of the head" is nothing >but a rough substitute for it. > >Economics aren't yet a true science, although such a tool has never been >so necessary as nowadays. That's the reason why econometrics ask >mathematics to fill the conceptual gap. This matter is economically the >most important one, but I'm afraid it doesn't interest the most of >economists... > >Sincerly > >Romain Kroes > >Laurence Shute wrote: >> >> Does this help any? From the General Theory (pp 297-98): >> >> "It is a great fault of symbolic pseudo-mathematical methods of formalising >> a system of economic analysis, such as we shall set down in section VI of >> this chapter, that they expressly assume strict independence between the >> factors involved and lose all their cogency and authority if this >> hypothesis is disallowed; whereas, in ordinary discourse, where we are not >> blindly manipulating but know all the time what we are doing and what the >> words mean, we can keep 'at the back of our heads' the necessary reserves >> and qualifications and the adjustments which we shall have to make later >> on, in a way in which we cannot keep complicated partial differentials 'at >> the back' of several pages of algebra which assume that they all vanish. >> Too large a proportion of recent 'mathematical' economics are mere >> concoctions, as imprecise as the initial assumptions they rest on, which >> allow the author to lose4 sight of the complexities and interdependencies >> of the real world in a maze of pretentious and unhelpful symbols." >> >> In 1940 Keynes was greatly worried that his American disciplices "were more >> orthodox than the master," in the sense that they failed to keep the >> necessary reservations "at the back of their head." > >
[PEN-L:11432] opposing the "isms"
Bill Lear writes: >The other "isms" [racism and sexism] are *also* fundamentally unjust and prejudiced relationships, which are *orthogonal* to the capitalist relationship (which is not to say that capitalists can't exploit racial divisions, etc.). I don't think it makes much sense to say that "class is the fundamental basis of and determinant of degree of overall oppression". Nor do I see much point in ranking these things. We should oppose sexism, because it is a perversion of a just and equitable relationship between the sexes. We should oppose racism because it too is a perversion of just and equitable racial relations. Capitalism should be opposed, on entirely separate (though similar) moral grounds, neither more nor less, because it is a perversion of the just and equitable relationship between labor and productive property.< While I agree with the moral argument, I want to add another. Opposing racism or sexism (hopefully both) also helps us undermine capitalism, by counteracting the divide and conquer that capitalists use. Further, efforts to undermine capitalist power by other means can undermine the ability of capitalists to exploit preexisting divisions within the working class and thus the extent of sexism & racism. (BTW, the idea that capitalism created racism & sexism is crap. Rather, capitalism has changed the form of these abominations.) So, tactically and strategically, the fight against capitalism, racism, and sexism should be unified. If there is any argument for "the primacy of class relations," it is _dynamic_. Capitalism, the social system of which the current set of class relations are a crucial component, is a fundamentally "revolutionary" mode of production, as Marx & Engels pointed out (in the MANIFESTO). It tends to shake up and undermine preexisting noncapitalist social institutions, including racism, sexism, and capitalism itself. (Capitalism shakes itself up: that's what "crisis theory" is about.) On the other hand, sexism & racism (or, more accurately, patriarchy and racial domination) are very conservative institutions. They lack the aggressive competition to accumulate profits (and accumulation to compete) that drives capitalism ahead, to knock down "Chinese Walls" in its path (and destroy Nature, BTW). (It's the difference between M-C-M' (capitalism) and C-M-C (racism, sexism).) Contrary to the "Marxism of the 2nd International," the tendency does not mean that capitalism automatically _abolishes_ sexism, racism, and capitalism. Rather, it means that capitalism creates _opportunities_ for those fighting these institutions. If those of us fighting these institutions don't succeed in taking advantage of those opportunities, racism, sexism, and capitalism are reestablished in new forms. in pen-l solidarity, Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ. 7900 Loyola Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90045-8410 USA 310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950 "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- K. Marx, paraphrasing Dante A.
[PEN-L:11431] methodology
Ken Hanly writes:> I agree with Jim that induction and deduction can be complementary in that induction or abduction could be used to generate hypotheses that can then be tested through deduction of what must be true if the hypotheses are correct. While the hypothetico-deductive method no doubt stresses the deductive aspect overmuch and relied too much on problematic positivist ideas of verification (or falsification with Popper) it still strikes me as far superior to the model of Lakatos who along with Kuhn seem to me to be vastly over-rated philosophers of science. While Kuhn's description of historical paradigm shifts is interesting enough his epistemological relativism in which he holds ... that there is no body of neutral judgments to test hypotheses (since all observation is said to be theory laden - including this observation of Kuhn?) is just plain goofiness on stilts no matter how popular it may be. Although Lakatos' points out real problems in Popper's falsificationist view, Popper is by far the more original thinker.< I agree with Ken's rejection of Kuhn, but since when is being a "more original thinker" a key criterion in methodological discussions? (It smacks of appeal to authority, a logical fallacy.) Lakatos, to my mind, makes Popper much clearer, getting us far away from "naive falsificationism" that sees any proposition that isn't falsifiable as totally bogus. (This is an especial problem since falsificationism isn't falsifiable.) In every "scientific research program," there's a "hard core" of propositions that can't be falsified. And getting beyond Lakatos, this implies that ideology can play an important role, even in the "hard sciences." in pen-l solidarity, Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ. 7900 Loyola Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90045-8410 USA 310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950 "As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; as far as they are certain, they really do not refer to reality." -- Albert Einstein.
[PEN-L:11430] Re: ReTemporary Removal From List
Hello, Try sending a message to listproc@anthrax set pen-l mail postpone A. S. Fatemi wrote: > > Hell Michael, > > I have requested several times to temporarily be removed from the list > for the summer. Our system can not keep too many messages. The automatic > system does not work, what should I do. > > Best regards, > > Ali > > A. S. Fatemi > Professor and Chairman > Department of Economics > University Coordinator of Strategic Planning > The American University of Paris > 102 rue Saint Dominique > 75007 Paris > > Tel:(33) 01 40 62 06 40 > Fax:(33) 01 47 53 88 03 > http://www.Fatemi.com -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 916-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:11429] ReTemporary Removal From List
Hell Michael, I have requested several times to temporarily be removed from the list for the summer. Our system can not keep too many messages. The automatic system does not work, what should I do. Best regards, Ali A. S. Fatemi Professor and Chairman Department of Economics University Coordinator of Strategic Planning The American University of Paris 102 rue Saint Dominique 75007 Paris Tel:(33) 01 40 62 06 40 Fax:(33) 01 47 53 88 03 http://www.Fatemi.com
