Re: AUT: Re: what is to be done with what is to be done? Survival of the "FIT"

[Sebastian Budgen <sebastian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Thanks for reminding me.

On Oct 28, 2004, at 8:07 PM, Peter van Heusden wrote:

> Sebastian Budgen wrote:
>
>> Well, you'll be able to judge when the volume comes out, but the
>> other papers were generally relatively scholarly attempts to engage
>> at a greater level of detail with one or other particular element of
>> Lenin's thought and relate this to contemporary problems. Doug's
>> piece, whatever its merits, does not attempt to do this, in the view
>> of the editors (who include Slavoj, by the way).
>>
>> However, Doug, you will no doubt throw this back in my face, but were
>> you interested in writing a new piece that, for example, examined
>> Lenin's writings on finance capitalism, state capitalism and so
>> forth, and related them, even if very critically, to contemporary
>> issues, that would be most welcome.
>>
> But the whole point of Doug's piece was that economics that Lenin
> based his theory of imperialism on *don't* relate to contemporary
> issues! So are you saying that the only acceptable papers in your
> volume are ones that agree with Lenin?
>
> Peter
>
>
>
>     --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
>



     --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---