Re: Wolfson on Marx

["Justin Schwartz" <jkschw@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Several of these points are not so obvious:

> three points: (1) Marx didn't predict or even try to "prove" the "breakdown
> of capitalism."

Rosa Luxemburg, for anyone, disagreed. She might not have been right, but
that she thought so indicates that the view is not wacko.

 But I
> remember
> very clearly that Wolfson saying that he rejected Marx's idea that society
> has contradictions. Instead, he says, the conflicts in society represent
> the clash of "contraries" (maybe quoting Popper). To me the terminology
> isn't very important, but Wolfson doesn't even pause to reflect about the
> meaning of the difference between "contradictions" and "contraries."

This is a semantic difference. W didn't like the word "contradiction." but
he accepted the idea that there were antagonistic conflicts of interest that
destabilize society.

> (3) I didn't say that Wolfson was an "ideological hack" but rather that I
> found that his book wasn't useful except as a compendium of errors and
> misinterpretations that can be combatted. I don't know the man well enough
> to say anything about his status as a hack.  However, his view that
> "capitalism has solved its contradictions" is clearly ideological.

Sure, that view is ideological, but my recollection of the book, which is
hazy as yours, was that it was useful. Course if I am any kind of Marxist, I
am an AM, so my standards are probably more tolerant towards Wolfson's sort
of thing than yours are. --jks

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.