Date sent: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 19:06:39 -0500
To: pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Doug Henwood <dhenwood@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [PEN-L:21439] Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re:
social democracy
Send reply to: pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
This whole discussion about social democracy and marxist
economics disturbs me (disgusts me?) on two levels. First, on the
practical level, if it weren't for SD I would never have had the chance
to arrive above the level of the working class. My grand parents
were miners, my parents were able to become school teachers,
and I and my wife could become professionals --all on the basis of
social democratic party politics. ( My grandparents and parents
were both active in labour/social democratic politcal parties
politics.) so the kind of sh.. that we get from the rigid marxists is
not something I have much respect for. My grandparents and
parents were deeply involved with the Winnipeg General Strike and
the basic strikes and social strugles for human, racial and political
rights during the 1930s through the 1960s so this kind of academic
shit I don't want to hear about.
I have done research in Sweden, Britain, Yugoslavia, Australia, and
eastern Europe (and published in "acceptable" academic (including
Marxist economic journals such as Monthly Review and Canadian
Dimension.) The level of discussion of soci al democratic
economics on this list is appalling. I would not accept it as
acceptable at a second year university level. If we are so ignorant
of social democratic theory and practice we would be better off not
to advertise the fact. The same should be said of institutional
theory from Berles and Meanes, Galbraith, Darity and all the other
institutionalists.
Pen-L should not parade its ignorance of alternative economic
paradigms.
Paul Phillips,
Economics,
University of Manitoba
Michael Perelman wrote:
>Another Swedish question. Doesn't Sweden have one of the most
>concentrated industrial structures in the world?
Yup, think it does. The Wallenberg family's Investor trust controls
some enormous portion of Swedish industry. Such structures are good
for social democracy; dispersed stockowner structures like the U.S.'s
are its enemy.
Doug