[lbo-talk] layoffs = death

Tahir Wood twood at uwc.ac.za
Mon Feb 4 00:47:14 PST 2008



>>> <lbo-talk-request at lbo-talk.org> 02/01/08 10:24 PM >>>
From: Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] layoffs = death On Feb 1, 2008, at 4:16 AM, Tahir Wood wrote:


> However, let's just note in passing
> that this immiseration argument, which is rightly despised, is often
> deliberately conflated with another quite different argument
> concerning
> the sustainability of capitalist society. (The very prominent list
> member who does this most often for rhetorical effect knows who he
> is.)

I assume this would be me, though I don't get your point. Capitalist society has proved itself sustainable, despite a million predictions to the contrary, for more several centuries. Its luck may run out sooner or later - maybe even sooner, who knows? - but the presumption

has to be that it will remain, to use the language of accountants, a going concern. It didn't merely survive its greatest crisis, that of the 1930s, it emerged stronger from it. Why call it unsustainable? What's gained by that, especially since the odds are you'll be proved

wrong for the rest of your lifetime? Doug

Doug, this is now bordering on the pigheaded. First of all there is no concession here that the two issues I mentioned, with great clarity, are distinct. If you cannot distinguish them then I'm not going to debate either of them with you. As to the question of what is to be gained, just look at the part of my message that you snipped - the general answer is there. Finally, I note that you imply that the only reason one would want to debate something is to be proved right. And there's the rub, as I've suspected all along. The implication is now quite clear: People who argue that capitalism is unsustainable want to be proved right; therefore they actually want the system to collapse, for many people to die, for great immiseration to take place, just so that they can have the pleasure of being proved right. You have absolutely no conception of someone wanting to debate a point for any more important reason than this, and I have to say that that kind of thinking reflects very poorly on you, nice guy that you are in many other respects. It's actually a bit of a shocker to have it emerge as clearly as this. Tahir -------------- next part -------------- All Email originating from UWC is covered by disclaimer http://www.uwc.ac.za/portal/public/portal_services/disclaimer.htm



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list