[OPE-L:5703] Re: Re: Re: de-bunking the de-bunk

[Rakesh Narpat Bhandari <rakeshb@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

From Steve's 5698


> From my point of view, these arguments feel a bit like fighting the
> Black Knight in "Monty Python and the Holy Grail". From my point of
> view--and from the point of view of the historians of economic
> thought who refereed my papers on this issue--I've already cut off
> both legs (the belief that the LTV is Marx's fundamental theory of
> value, and the belief that the LTV is consistent with his theory of
> value). Now VFT and TSS interpretations are threatening to bite me
> to death. Sorry, but I'd prefer to engage with other heterodox
> economists who don't share these hangups.

I appreciate your presence here Steve, but if you would prefer to
engage other hetero economists, why are you on this list? It would
seem to me that you attach some importance to having your VFT, TSS
and other so called orthodox Marxists opponents shown to be wrong. I
have only once in my life attempted to show that the hare krishnas
had misinterpreted the bhagvat gita (that is they had misinterpreted
what was meant by always keeping krishna on your lips). But you do
not seem to find your opponents to be beneath engagement; I am not
subscribed to the hare krishna list serve.

At any rate who is the bigger fool for continuing to fight? the black
knight or his opponent. Obviously the latter, you have missed the
real point of the Monty Python joke. So if you really think we value
theoretic marxists are the black knight, wouldn't the joke be on you
for drawing your sword on this list repeatedly?

Rakesh