Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
>
> Today, few economists are leftists and few leftists are economists.
> But there used to be more of both. People like Harry Magdoff had a
> chance to personally experience a little of how to run a mixed
> economy, and imho, such experience helps leftists ground themselves in
> the real world, so those who have a chance to have it should take it.
Harry Magdoff never wrote a single word about how to run an economy and
Karl Marx warned against going down that path. Caroll Cox used to deploy
his words on the appropriate occasions.
> Those of us who are neither economists nor have a chance to experience
> real-world difficulty of trying to manage national economy under
> capitalism as much in the interest of people as possible should still
> learn to see the world as if we were. It's not the only perspective
> we should have, but it is an indispensable one.
Go ahead if this is something you find entertaining. I myself prefer the
NY Times crossword puzzle or playing chess.
> It's clear that whatever choice people make, liberalism, populism,
> socialism, or whatever, the economy that results form it experiences
> difficulties specific to its type as well as brings benefits also
> specific to it. We have to understand what they are, so we can
> clarify alternatives for people.
Here's my idea of clarifying alternatives:
Friedrich Engels once said: "Bourgeois society stands at the crossroads,
either transition to socialism or regression into barbarism." What does
"regression into barbarism" mean to our lofty European civilization?