Max, you are setting up straw arguments to knock down.
There is nothing wrong with reform if that is what you want. I happen to be a reform oriented democratic socialist with roots in the Christian left.
There is nothing inherently antisemitic in criticizing aspects of fiscal or monetary policy, or the Federal Reserve policies, or the Federal Reserve itself, etc. ad nauseum.
The items you want to argue against all evidence are:
1). That finance capitalism is not inextricably connected to industrial capitalism .
2). That there is some constructive rhetorical way to pull finance capitalism away from industrial capitalism as a tactical argument for organizing for reform.
3). That a "populist" critique of financial capitalism has not repeately (repeately, repeately, repeately, repeately) been used to scapegoat Jews.
Having just co-written a 500-page book showing how "anti-elite" populism can turn towards ethinc scapegoating, especially antisemitism, I am going to want to see more persuasive arguments that those you have provided here. Postone's arguments are reinforced by many other analysts and historians.
Populism's half-baked critique of financial elites have often spoiled into rank antisemitism, so we are not serving you a canard, nor can you duck it, no matter how saucy the polemic on your platter.
-Chip Berlet
----- Original Message ----- From: Max Sawicky <sawicky at epinet.org> To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com> Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 2:19 PM Subject: RE: Who Rules America Today? (was Re: On the Defense of Parasitic Finance)
> . . . Finance dominates production because finance is the means by which
> ownership is organized in a modern economy. How in god's name do you
propose
> to attack this without taking on the whole capitalist class? Doug
>
>
> I was provoked to engage this by the anti-semitism
> canards in re: populism and finance.
>