Re: [A-List] Re: Frank and Jones -- money and oil

[Andre Gunder Frank <franka@xxxxxxx>]

there is always plenty of hydrogen, and evcen of sunshine
On Fri, 23 Nov
2001, Tom Warren wrote:

> Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 20:03:37
> From: Tom Warren <tomzbox@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reply-To: a-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To: a-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [A-List] Re: Frank and Jones -- money and oil
>
>
> I almost began this response with [ARRRRRRGHG!] but I have modified it to
> merely:
>
> [sigh]
>
> You know SO much better, Mark! I can only conclude that you are posting to
> an audience who needs special speech recognition devices.
>
> I will post just a couple of comments (I have to go eat some leftover
> pumpkin pie).
>
> Mark asks:
> >Eh? In what sense am I Julian Simon-like?
>
> You are JS-like in the sense that you demonstrate technological Pollyannaism
> with the statement "it can simply be priced out of the market and
> substituted by other 'resources'."  There are at present no 'other
> resources', and you are aware of this. There will NOT BE sufficient 'other
> resources' on line to feed either capitalism OR social revolution, or ...
> "the utopian impossibility of prgrammes of *reform*."  You are shaking the
> cornucopia and saying "Just wait a moment, there is more in there, I swear."
>
> But I have no doubt that you are correct, that it can be priced out of the
> market, unless one needs a quart of oil for one's Lexus, or needs to eat.
>
> Mark says:
> >It's the political economy of oil which matters. The ultimate goal of
> >analysis (for a marxist like me) remains the production, >circulation and
> >distribution of value in capitalist commodity->producing society. [snip]
> >....
>
> And we're back to the old catechism of the "Value Theory" and the line it
> draws around what may be discounted about reality! ... and that's half the
> reason I put a [sigh] up above. After years of both taking on board the
> arguments of the 'modern neomalthusian ricardians' and arguing the veracity
> of their points, we still can't move beyond the possibility of modifying
> marxist theology even when it is so obviously incorrect and at opposition to
> the (physicalist) data. Cognitive Dissonance! (Or at least 'faith over
> reason' <g>)  Please, please, one day attempt to calculate all that
> non-value nature put into the commodities we're discussing. Just for fun?
>
> Mark says:
> >There are no 'oil shortages', and I've repeatedly argued just this: and the
> >current price of oil proves exactly this point. It has >collapsed and is
> >tending towards $10/bbl! Why is that? Because of a >slump in production and
> >the onset of general crisis. It's the >political consequences of *this*
> >crisis which should exercise us, >analytically.
>
> Uhh, excuse me, but I just went back and skimmed the archives. You know ...
> the ones where you and Mike K place all those articles about Russian
> INCREASES in production? (temporary, temporary, merely a blip while the line
> is still toward depletion. There will be shortages. <g>)
>
> And it's strictly MY opinion, but I think we ought to still analytically
> exercise the physical consequences, too.
>
> Mark says:
> >>this argument is very popular in certain circles as you
> >know and is also as a matter of fact, well supported empirically. ...the
> >strengths of this argument is precisely its strong empirical >basis,
> >...However this argument, though strong, and though important, >is NOT my
> >argument.
>
> Okay, I will let ya slide, my brother, as long as you quit that Simon-like
> adherance to discounting the empirical data and find SOME way to incorporate
> them into your calculations-which-must-be-totally-based-upon-marxism. And
> take off them rose-colored glasses.
>
> Lysenko, oops I mean Mark says:
> >wheat is actually a trade in water: wheat is a substitute commodity. >But
> >this huge supply of grain is completely dependent on the >petrochemical
> >basis of agribiz ...
>
> And the prefix "petro" in the above statement moves ALL oil into the status
> of 'resource' -- permanently -- unless Ol' Julian is right and the
> cornucopia is rapidly going to produce some Star Trek-like alternative.
> Transporter Technology? Hey, EYE'm ready ... Oh, no wait, that relies upon
> energy too. (but at least it ignores the laws of physics. Point for you.)
>
> Mark counters:
> >Now, this neomalthusian view is a powerful argument but
> >nonetheless it ignores the real mechanisms at work, [snip for >brevity] ...
> >there is a simultaneous process of under-accumulation and
> > >over-accumulation of capital. [snip] ...these processes are only the
> > >forms taken by the logic of accumulation itself, and therefore these
> >surface forms,however existentially devastating,
>
> Ooooooh, NOW I see! Forgive me. You were talking about the realm of the
> *mind* here, and not any real world we have to deal with in the next 35
> years based upon physics and the problems of capital accumulation and
> production that are already in play. THAT's what allows us to discount the
> data, and heretics like Ricardo and Malthus and such like! I take it all
> back. You are of course correct. I was looking at a whole 'nother set of
> issues. Sorry. My bad. Mea Culpa. Ignore all I wrote above.
>
> >It is this intercalation of material and political processes which is
> >important to analyse; this might help us to see, for example, that the war
> >in Afghanistan is actually neither an 'oil' war no a >civilisational
> >conflict, but class struggle.
> >
> >Mark Jones
>
> 'Kay. I will be totally interested and attentive when you get around to
> formulating how the class struggle uses the information it gets from such
> analyses and "seeing" to confront the material issues.
>
> existentially yours,
> tom
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
>
>




    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

                    ANDRE  GUNDER  FRANK
Department of History			   Home
University of Nebraska Lincoln [UNL]       4440 North 7th Street
612 Oldfather                              Apt. 107
P.O. Box 880327				   Lincoln, NE 68521 USA
Lincoln, NE 68588-0327 			   Tel: 1-402-742 7931
Tel: 1-402-472 3251=direct 2414=Dpt        Fax: 1-402-742 7932
Fax: 1-402-472 8839
E-Mail: franka@xxxxxxx          Web Page: csf.colorado.edu/agfrank/