IMPORTANT: If you cite this message, OPE-L policy requires you not to reveal the identity of the author.
You may cite this message only if you do not disclose who wrote it.
moment happened when the Authority claimed that Michael H hadn't seriously considered Grossmann: evidently, the Authority was unaware that Michael had published several pieces which referred to Grossmann.]
I said that Michael H had not presented on this list a careful critique for why Marx had provided the rudiments of what he had wanted to say on the world market. This is a matter of fact. Certainly there has be no quotation of major parts of HG's argument and systematic refutation of him on this question. Michael Lebowitz of course did offer a systematic refutation of HG's idea that Marx had provided the rudiments for his book on wage labor. That I found Lapides more convincing does not mean Lebowitz did not make a systematic argument. But this is not the case with HG's case for Marx's essential completion of the book on the world market. And whether Michael H has "referred" to Grossmann elsewhere is irrelevant.
Rakesh
- Re: [OPE-L] Raya Dunayevskaya Myths and Legends, (continued)
- Re: [OPE-L] Raya Dunayevskaya Myths and Legends, Rakesh Bhandari Sun 13 Nov 2005, 16:20 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Raya Dunayevskaya Myths and Legends, Paul Zarembka Sun 13 Nov 2005, 16:31 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Raya Dunayevskaya Myths and Legends, Rakesh Bhandari Sun 13 Nov 2005, 16:41 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Raya Dunayevskaya Myths and Legends, Rakesh Bhandari Sun 13 Nov 2005, 17:14 GMT