Gernot Kohler,
Your post doesn't support Richard Moore, Gernot. Rather it supports my
argument. Richard rejects the Marxian standpoint. Singh and Gatade do not.
They argue that "permanent prediction" is a "travesty of the scientific
method of Marx." This is correct and precisely what I have argued. Marxian
analysis is an open system that involves concrete historical analysis.
Because historical systems are always in transformation, a core premise in
historical materialism, the dialectical method must be used. My argument
concerns the pragmatic success of historical materialism as a
historical-scientific system.
As for Moore's forward of Carolyn Ballard's forward of Louis Proyect's
selected (selective) quotes from the enigmatic James Petras, I might
prepare a response, but I presently have other commitments. So Moore will
have to wait. But while he is waiting, I am still waiting for Moore's
original analysis on the labor theory of value and an original critique of
historical materialism. He said a couple of posts ago that he doesn't need
to read anybody because all his analysis is original. But since then all
he has done is dissemble, manufacture vague strawdogs, or quote other
people. Show me the analysis.
Andy