Re: Re: Re: The Hayek debate concludes

[michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Jim D. was referring to somebody else, Greg Ransom, who runs the Hayek
list.

>
> Michael, who's being insulting now? The only one of why who has, in my view, actually responded to my arguments is Jim. Others who are bored with whether their socialist ideals are workable can go on to other threads. I will talk about the matter with Jim and whoever cares to join in. --jks
>
> In a message dated Tue, 18 Jul 2000  6:16:52 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Jim Devine <jdevine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> << At 03:01 PM 7/18/00 -0700, you wrote:
> >On the basis of his sheer endurance, let us credit Justin with victory.
> >Hayek has won and the debate is over.
>
> I haven't finished my reply to his reply to my long message that I posted
> over the weekend. Do you want me to quit? or go off-list? (Shall I expunge
> the name "Hayek" from my file so that it won't attract that Hayek fanatic
> (I forget his name) who comes in to every list and tells everyone how
> wonderful his Hero was?)
>
> It seems to me that the only way that Hayek has truly "won" is because the
> fall of the old USSR (and its allies) and the nose-dive of the old social
> democracies has made "There Is No Alternative" the hegemonic Party Line. I
> see no reason that pen-l should toe that line. If everyone else were
> jumping off a cliff, would you do so too?
>
> I am taking a long time to reply to Justin because I have other things to
> do with my life and I want to be careful. That doesn't mean I'm done.
>
> Jim Devine jdevine@xxxxxxx &  http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
>
>  >>
>
>


--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929

Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx