brenner

[Patrick Bond]

> From:          "christian a. gregory" <driver at nervm.nerdc.ufl.edu>
> ... he seems to bank on the notion of competition as
> a way of describing the historical evolution of economic fields--of the
> "progress" of forces of development--but doesn't, from what i can tell, say
> a whole lot about the tendency toward monopoly that subtends that...

Why is this necessarily true? The ability of capital to 
conglomeratize and jump from one to another circuit means that 
monopolistic processes in particular sectors are perfectly consistent 
with intensively competitive processes throughout the economy, right?