praxeological implications of AGF-G thesis

The Frank-Gill thesis that there does not exist (and never has existed)
a phase of history with a capitalist mode of production is bound to have
some praxeological implications. For example, who or what is the bad guy
? (This was mentioned by another discussant.) Another question is: who
or what is the good guy? When Galileo and friends proved that the
Ptolemaic view of the kosmos was wrong and antiquated, they also
relativized the power of the pope. It seems that the Frank-Gill thesis
(a) on the scientific plane, puts Marx's view of historical stages into
the museum of quaint historical artifacts and (b) on the praxeological
plane, erodes the traditional Marxist claim to be, apriori and by
definition, the vanguard of the progressive camp. Nice, I would say,
since that creates more doctrinal space for a variety of Marxisms (none
of which can claim to be the only heir of the true mantle) and for other
non-Marxist varieties of progressives (including "grandmothers for peace
and justice" or myself) and supports intra-camp democracy and
progressive pluralism. Did I get you and IT wrong again?

GK






_________________________________________________________________________________
Still paying $22.95 a month for unlimited dial-up? Get 3webXS, only $9.95 a 
month!!!
Switch & Save at http://www.Get3web.com/?mkid=emt001