[A-List] FW: list -- did Stalinism end in the Fifties?

[Waistline2 at aol.com]

In a message dated 12/11/02 5:33:09 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
Waistline2 at aol.com writes:

> >> Melvin writes:
>> 
>> >I seek principled unity but my doctrine is anti-Trotskyite.
>> 
>> I understand this but I think we have to decisively move on. We simply 
>> have
>> to abandon this useless schismatic way of thinking. My reaction to being
>> told I'm a Stalinist (whatever that is, but I am definitely not one) is to
>> say, OK, if it helps, call me a Stalinist, whatever. Now, about that
>> substantive issue I'm trying to raise here...'
>> 
>> 
>> Great things are happening in Venezuela and scores of other places. The 
>> poor
>> are learning to speak, and to shout. Let them speak, let everyone else 
>> shut
>> up for a while, and let us only speak if we speak in their name and with
>> their voice.
>> 
>> Mark
>> 
>> 
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> Melvin P
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Bottom line issue you raise as I understand it is summarized as: 

No political policy can change an economic law system. Thinking good thoughts 
cannot undo the laws that govern energy conversion, its use and the law of 
value. 

Thermodynamic principles prevent the invention or construction of an energy 
device that can produce more energy that it consumes. To believe such is 
possible is to go over to the alchemist equation which is historically 
obsolete and absurd. 

I believe this proposition as a theory and material principle. 

My presentations are concerning market fluctuations in real time and how 
human being react to them in real time. When I state and stated there was no 
shortage of oil in the world today this is stated as a doctrine governing the 
class struggle and not as a principle of energy conversion. 

Alternative sources of energy are emerging on the market and this is real. 
Your point is that in their "alternativeness" any new energy source has to be 
created and will in the last instance consume more energy that the devices 
they replace, by definition. 

OK

I yield.

Is this not the transition phase, which means the process of the leap to 
something else. And the end product of the leap is unknowable. 

I believe that you take a position that the "end product" is govern by the 
law of energy conversion and no matter how it looks the question remains the 
definable quantity of petroleum even when we cannot measure its finiteness. 
Further, not only is this the big picture, but the framework that will govern 
the evolution of humanity as a specifies.

OK. I surrender. 


I was deeply impressed by the article that Cburford and I reproduced by you. 
It helped to bridge some rather large gaps in my understanding and the 
theoretical basis of it match mine exactly. Our differences have to do with 
doctrine of the class struggle, which is minor. 

It seems to me that my theoretical approach to the mode of production is more 
advanced than most and this does not prevent me from being weak in other 
areas. This is why the collective is always greater than its individual 
parts. This thing about the impact of the robot, the mode of production and a 
clear articulation of value and the law of value is off the hook.

It took me 20 freaking years to understand how to articulate these concepts 
only to be hit by the law of thermodynamics. 

The implications of this law is staggering and means our future is in space. 
I only sensed this and you have consolidated it for me. 

I am no Utopian anything. This matter about "the chatter of value at the 
borders" was placed in the wrong historical context by me and I thought this 
was a quote from L. Trotsky" and became upset - doctrinaire. 

When you speak of the "chatter of value at the border" it acquires a totally 
different meaning because of our historical perspective and time frame. If 
this is you, then the "chatter of value at the border" is heavy . . . .Real 
heavy. I like that. There is of course the screaming of value within the 
borders of the Union of Soviets. You speak to this in your article, but it 
can only be deciphered by Marxist - real ones. 


Your article was "off the hook" - man. Damn. 


Melvin P. 


Talk about teaching an old dog new tricks. Damn the energy thing is 
staggering. Hey, space is the final frontier. 


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 5004 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20021211/cf335ab2/attachment.txt>