Received: from mail1.sas.upenn.edu (MAIL1.SAS.UPENN.EDU [165.123.26.32])
          by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.4/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with ESMTP
	  id LAA20656 for <socgrad@csf.colorado.edu>; Mon, 6 Oct 1997 11:32:29 -0600 (MDT)
Received: (from jmote@localhost)
	by mail1.sas.upenn.edu (8.8.5/8.8.3/SAS.03)
	id NAA24522 for socgrad@csf.colorado.edu; Mon, 6 Oct 1997 13:32:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: jmote@sas.upenn.edu (Jonathan E Mote)
Message-Id: <199710061732.NAA24522@mail1.sas.upenn.edu>
Subject: Re: Marxian Theory: Continuing Validities
To: socgrad@csf.colorado.edu
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 13:32:27 -0400 (EDT)
In-Reply-To: <3437BEBE.A97419B1@cats.ucsc.edu> from "Christian" at Oct 5, 97 09:22:23 am
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I'm not sure if I am the "James" referred to by Christian, but I'd like to 
respond.  I'm not necessarily dismissing the points of TR, just the 
manner in which they are argued.  Argument by assertion does not 
progressively advance understanding.  For example, the assertion 
that "Capitalism creates unemployment (a surplus population) while 
producing a huge surplus" is an insight shared by neoclassical economic 
theory.  It is hardly a validity claimed solely by marxian theory.  

Plus, I would argue that the burden of proof lies with TR.  For instance, 
his point that "Capitalism requires war and/or a huge military apparatus 
to obtain raw materials, cheap labor, and/or for markets for its "surplus" 
production" cries out for substantiation.  What are the mechanisms at 
work here?    

Let's go a little further and take a look at TR's points 6 and 7.

>6. Capitalism crushes small business and drives the small farmer
> off the farms as firms become national and transnational.
>
>7. The State apparatus grows and grows: to help small capitalists
> and farmers; to take care of the surplus population; to guard
> the interests of capital overseas; to police the excesses of
> amoral corporations.

These two assertions are completely contradictory and in drastic need of 
clarification.  What is the role of the state?  Is it beholden to 
capitalist interests?  If so, why would it help small capitalists and 
farmers if the inner dynamic of capitalism is to "crush" small business and 
farmers?

Jonathon Mote

**************************************************

 Christian wrote:
> 
> Dear James and Thomas,
> 
> Your out of hand dismissal of the points that TR makes regarding the continuing
> validity of Marxist theory is confusing and smacks "dilletantish".  Perhaps you
> could 'attempt' to dispute each point one by one....
> 
> If you attempt to do so, I think you will find them fairly difficult to shoot
> down.   Just for starters how can you disagree with the fact that capitalism
> creates unemployment yet at the same time creates a HUGE surplus?  Structural
> unemployment is a global phenomena and is built into the very fabric of the
> capitalist world-system.  It (sic)  not only creates massive dislocation, in
> addition it creates and maintains undeniable/unexcusable inequality for regions
> throughout the world.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Christian
> 
>