'Democratic Money' & the Tragedy of Anti-Marxism

Max Sawicky sawicky at epinet.org
Mon Nov 15 09:20:52 PST 1999


CC: Come on Max, you're a better reader than that. She thinks (knows) there aret *others* who think money is only symbolic. There is in fact a very long tradition which treats money as a language. That same tradition tends to treat statesmen as artists. Pound is sort of the final grand outcome of that tradition. Those traditions are ultimately vicious. (Re treating statesmen as artists: The sculptor molds clay; the statesman as artist treats people as clay.) Carrol
>>>>>>>>>>

As an economist I am used to thinking about money in terms of its important functional role.

As a political person, I am interested in turning this functional role to constructive use. I understand that since money is an arcane subject, the public is a stew of illusions and prejudices about money.

The populists had a clearer view of money than most of their critics on this list. They understood that an inelastic currency and a private monopoly on credit favored creditors over debtors, stasis over economic growth, and concentration over broad participation in enterprise.

It is true that they did not understand the primacy of extirpating all markets and private ownership of capital on principle. And neither do I.

All this literary crappola is why I left the exalted discipline of lit-crit.

yrs, mbs



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list