Re: Nick Cohen on Thomas Frank

[andie nachgeborenen <andie_nachgeborenen@xxxxxxxxx>]

Well, as I said, the superprofits/proletarian
aristocracy theory does not seem to be a good theory
even on a rational choice theoretic approach. The
"Kansas" phenomenon that Franks describes involves
people who do not think they are affluent and
protecting their wealth, rather who know they are not
affluent, who resent the wealthy liberal elites, and
who identify cultural issuesa s being highly salient.

Btw, doesn't it seem funny to you to think you
aretreating people as rational actors if you ascribe
to them manifestly irrational beliefs about their
social status? Why is it better to have irrational
beliefs that one is well off and benefits economically
by imperialism than irrational beliefs about the
country being dominated by rich liberal reporters from
New York and gay Hollywood actors?

Anyway, I'm probably way more sympathetic to rational
choice theory than most here -- I have written in the
analytical Marxist manner and defended decision
theoretic modeling and even the use of neoclassical
economics and game theory in radical social analysis.

 But I think it well never to forget for an instant
that the rational economic actor is an idealization
and an abstraction, a craeture of (really) bourgeois
economics) that does not describe actual human
psychology. Good thing for us on the left, because the
rational economic actor would never engage in
solidariric collective behavior such as a strike or a
picket line, much less anything more militant.

Odd that you, the professed orthodox Marxist-Leninist,
should insist on this essentially bourgeois economic
model. Marx's whole theory of ideology is designed to
explain in part why it does not necessarily operate on
real people -- why people behave irrationally in the
sense that they act against their own economic
interests.

jks



--- Charles Brown <cbrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Frank's __question_ is, why are people bring
> economically irrational? The "superprofits" theory,
> which I think does not fit the facts, dismisses
> Frank's question rather than answering it. Which is
> OK, but I'd rather see what economically irrational
> elements there are that might be going on here. I
> suspect on Theory of Ideology grounds, that people
> actually are often economically irrational. This has
> been a major theme in my own scholarly reserach and
> writing, so I havea  hobbyhorse to ride. Jks
>
>
> ^^^^^
> CB: Well, yea. You are looking for a rational
> explanation for why the people
> in Kansas are acting irrationally.
>
> One might also consider that the people in Kansas
> _think_ they are acting
> rationally. Perhaps they have the same illusion that
> Engels and Lenin had
> about Britain and the other Big Powers of a century
> ago. And said
> consideration wouldn't even contradict some the
> explanations you come up
> with for their irrational actions.
>
> On the other hand, maybe the people in Kansas are
> somewhat rational and
> self-interested - something like the socalled
> rational man in the economic
> models.
>




_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com