> >I listed several rather important changes between the capitalism of
> >the mid-19th cenutry and the early 21st - a rather long period of
> >time, and some rather profound changes. And i said there are great
> >structural continuities, too. I wondered, though, how much
> >analytical and political usefulness there was in pointing out the
> >eternal verities. After reading your & Yoshie's responses, I wonder
> >even more.
>
> You can't look at ceaselessly changing phenomena -- capitalism can't
> exist without changes -- and identify which are "great structural
> continuities" and which are "rather profound changes" unless your
> _theory_ is sparse and constant. There would be no identifiable
> structural continuity if you kept changing theory every time you
> encounter a new phenomenon.
....
> Some profound changes indeed, but do we need to change theory to make
> sense of them?
Yes. Otherwise you keep slotting what you see into the closest hole in your standard theory, regardless of whether it is still appropriate or productive.
Catherine
------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP at ArtsIT: http://admin.arts.usyd.edu.au/horde/imp/