Re: Welcoming Stan Goff Out of Marxism

[Doyle Saylor <doylesaylor@xxxxxxx>]

Greetings Economists,
On Dec 3, 2006, at 8:29 AM, Angelus Novus wrote:

> As far as Stan Goff's departure goes, I think the
> burden of proof is on the advocates of Marx-ism to
> make their case for Marx-ism's relevance.
Doyle;
I don't think it takes much for Marx to be relevant.  Where you write;

Angelus Novus;
The message to queer,
environmental, feminist, and anti-fascist and
anti-racist activists is: "hey, all you secondary
contradictions, there's room for all your modular
concerns here on the Marxist CPU."

Doyle;
Your computer metaphor is too restrictive.  All of the above really are
about the larger connection process.  One can take that as simple
person to person connection, or see that computed communications can do
a number of alterations of the connection.  In particular the one of
most interest in connections is to drive the number of connections up
both synchronously, and asynchronously.  Racism and sexism share the
physical properties of connection of the interface as well, so one
might ask of the interface does the social connection reflect a
universal equality.

I think you are too confident of the general nature of your view.  To
my mind knowledge production in a world of mobile massively parallel
computing seems like a good fit to Marx's views on knowledge in a
communist society as Ted Winslow pointed out earlier in relation to how
Marx characterized knowledge.
Doyle Saylor