>Excellent. Now, ready for another dizzying experience of retrofitting?
>
>Keynes/Foucault, queer 'renegades,' the 'foundation' and limits --
>(dis)solution -- of social democracy:
>
>***** from Henwood, _Wall Street_
>
>[Keynes] thought the _General Theory_ had solved "the" economic problem, in
>both theory and practice. With that single shot, he claimed, he'd killed
>both Ricardo _and_ Marx. To Keynes, both belonged to the "self-adjusting
>school" of "classical economics" (quoted in Behrens 1985), failing as they
>did to grasp the doctrine of liquidity preference and the drag on
>investment exerted by high interest rates. Here Marx and Ricardo are
>joined in their sunniness. But elsewhere he joined them in gloom: "Marxism
>is a highly plausible influence from the Ricardian economics, that
>capitalistic individualism cannot possibly work in practice." In both
>cases, the equivalence is as strange as Foucault's (1973, p. 262)
>declaration that the struggle between Marxians and Ricardians was "no more
>than storms in a children's paddling pool," since they both shared a common
>dream of an end to History....
Would change a word of that. Can't I admire much about Foucault and still disagree with him?
Doug