Re: [Marxism] Marx was a

[Steve Palmer <spalmer999@xxxxxxxxx>]

1. You have made your entire argument balance on one sentence from Marx.
2. It has been pointed out that this sentence has been ripped out of context 
and that, were one to choose the previous sentence, one could turn Marx into a 
disproportionality theorist.
3. It has been pointed out, with quotations, per your request, that Marx 
explicitly disavowed an underconsumptionist explanation.
4. It has also been pointed out that in its naive form, per your presentation, 
capitalism would never work.
5. Evidence has been presented from Marx to demonstrate that he thought the 
FROP to be central to his theory of crisis.
6. As Sartesian has pointed out, underconsumption/disproportionality (they are 
really the same thing - one viewed from the value side, the other from the use 
value side) is simply one of the manifestations of the FROP asserting itself.
7. To all of this, you keep repeating the same quote and have failed to respond 
to any of these specific criticisms.

Therefore your assertion that "you have no substantive reply" is simply untrue.

(And we haven't even gotten started on the politics of all this.)

"Every accusation is a confession."

--- On Fri, 1/23/09, Charles Brown <charlesb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> CB: Clearly this comment shows
> you have no substantive reply 
> to what I said.


      

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu