'Democratic Money' & the Tragedy of Anti-Marxism

[Max Sawicky]

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