At 03:35 AM 07/11/2002 +, Justin wrote:
I have not participated in this discussion. But I violently object to
Michael shutting down a discussion of a topic that a great many people on
the list are interested in, but that he, for some reason, has an allergy
too. There are a zillion topics that we beat to death. This one gets
Michael's goat. I don't know why. I think the usual rule should apply: if
you aren't interested, Michael, don't participate. If there are fair
number of people on the list who want to talk about something,a re are
doing so in a reasonbaly civil manner, let them do it. You don't see it
getting anywhere new? That's because you have made up your mind. You just
want various shades of denunciations of the evils of markets. That's find,
denounce away if you like. But lets others defend.
Well, yeah, if everyone is interested in continuing this discussion, fine.
I have not gotten much from it myself. The problem for me is that the
discussion has remained extremely abstract and has not done much other than
reinforce the prejudices people had when they started the discussion.
People have simply taken the nebulous concept of market -- like a
Platonic form; they have not distinguished what the differences might be
between a market under capitalism vs what how it might function under
democractic socialism; they have not talked about whether the market should
be the locus of exchange for all labor and the products of labor, or
whether it needs to be limited, nor have they explained (to my
satisfaction) how they invisible hand of the market is an agent
preferrable to human intelligence and the process of consensus building.
So, if we're going to have a discussion, it would be really nice if people
addressed some of these issues.
Joanna
