'what's the point of "theory" if you are using it, like David Harvey, only to construct an elaborate rationalization for campaigning for the Democratic Party?'
Well, yes, but that was rather my point.
The interesting thing about Harvey is that he reconciles a very pessimistic interpretation of the prospects for capitalism with a throughly reformist outlook. (That's a reversal of the long-standing association between economic optimism and political reformism, as per Kautsky.)
More to the point, Harvey's political opportunism seems to raise no questions about the theoretical analysis that leads up to it.
My point would be that Harvey's account of imperialism needs to be criticised. But, as you suggest, there is no appetite for that kind of theoretical clarification.
"Without revolutionary theory, there can be no revolutionary movement.". Lenin, What Is To Be Done?, 1902, CW, Vol.5, p.369
-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20040817/98d232a2/attachment.htm>