Travis
>
> I'm just a junior law prof at a fourth tier law
> school, unable to repress anyone except maybe some
> students.
>
> However, I can observe that Marx would not say that
> value theory was an "eternal truth," even if he
> thought it was true, he thought it was true only of
> generalized, highly commoditized market societies. (A
> point insisted on by Lukacs, inter alia.)
>
> I don't concede the point, and don't care to argue it;
> it strikes me as boring theology at this point. Time
> remains important and illuminated by Marx's thought,
> but not by the value debates. Those that think
> otherwise are free to believe and write as they like.
>
> What is interesting to me here is that in the
> mid-1960s Soviet and American social scientists
> thought that time was a politically neutral subject --
> a genuinely draw dropping assumption that reveals a
> depth of ignorance about Marxism that itself tells us
> a lot about the the nature of the cold war and what,
> in the end, was won or lost in that conflict.
>
> --- tfast <tfast at yorku.ca> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > > Time is after all the core of Marx's critique of
> > > political economy -- not just in the refinement
> > and
> > > debate (please let it rest) about value theory, >
> >
> > Eternal truths, they never rest, but always resist
> > repression. It is one of
> > the great events of life that I was alive to see
> > this debate so squarely won
> > by the LTOV.
> >
> > Travis
> >
> > ___________________________________
> >
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk