Abraham Rotstein, Weekend Notes I - Revision history

Santiago Pinault at 19:28, 27 July 2020

2020-07-27T19:28:07Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:28, 27 July 2020
Line 229:		Line 229:

	=== Sundry ===		=== Sundry ===
	<ref>This sub-section is called “Other discussions” on he text, conversely to the Table of Contents.</ref> Orwell's 1984 is a travesty on Humanity and a projection of Orwell's opinions of society.		<ref>This sub-section is called “Other discussions” on the text, conversely to the Table of Contents.</ref> Orwell's 1984 is a travesty on Humanity and a projection of Orwell's opinions of society.

	Graham Greene's novel have a pervading sens of selfless love in them - an abiding love.<br />		Graham Greene's novel have a pervading sens of selfless love in them - an abiding love.<br />

Santiago Pinault at 13:39, 2 December 2019

2019-12-02T13:39:56Z

Santiago Pinault: /* The Market and a Theory of Nationalism */

2019-12-02T10:45:37Z

The Market and a Theory of Nationalism

@@ Line 163: / Line 163: @@
 == The Market and a Theory of Nationalism ==
-{{Page |n°=16}}
+{{Page |n°=16}} (My question on their relationship)
-[[#mw-page-base|↑]]
+See books by C. Hayes, “The Age of Materialism”, for a theory of nationhood. For the bourgeois it is language and literature.
 == Discussion of My Letter of Dec. 17/55 ==

Santiago Pinault: /* The U.S.A. */

2019-11-27T15:40:18Z

The U.S.A.

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:40, 27 November 2019
Line 134:		Line 134:
	Polanyi at first thought that since the Federal government had no power, there was no government intervention. But actually, {{Page \|n°=13}} in the U.S. the states were helping business all the way - e.g. the railways. Thus it is meaningless to say that the state was not interfering, even tough e.g. no factory laws, no social insurance. Now we have old age, unemployment insurance etc.		Polanyi at first thought that since the Federal government had no power, there was no government intervention. But actually, {{Page \|n°=13}} in the U.S. the states were helping business all the way - e.g. the railways. Thus it is meaningless to say that the state was not interfering, even tough e.g. no factory laws, no social insurance. Now we have old age, unemployment insurance etc.

	Polanyi's original theory of Fascism was that the modern crisis was caused by the …		Polanyi's original theory of Fascism was that the modern crisis was caused by the disruption of the unity of society into the political and the economic. Has shifted his basis on the two meanings of economic to accept the compound meaning as the most important. Has shifted away from the theory that the unity of society was destroyed by the separation of economics and politics in the market system - although the disembeddedness idea is true.

	One couldn't point to a disruption in America society, ~~… […] {{English~~ to ~~type}}~~		One couldn't point to a disruption in America society, it didn't seem to be realistic. The new picture must show how the “market-free areas” grew: inside the corporation, inside the trade union and inside government.

	[[The Great Transformation]] didn't insist on the complete separation of politics and economics. ~~[…]~~		[[The Great Transformation]] didn't insist on fact of the complete separation of politics and economics in 19th century society. It is a European way of looking at it which is not generalizable. It doesn't mean that the “market theorem” is affected, but a complete separation is not true in the U.S. Rather the political system was subservient to business in the States e.g. were nowhere state-owned in the U.S.

	The Federal governement ran foreign policy, defence, and army, the courts and finance and treasury, but not industry, commerce or education. Federal power is entirely new since Roosevelt. (Canada is not very different).		The Federal governement ran foreign policy, defence, and army, the courts and finance and treasury, but not industry, commerce or education. Federal power is entirely new since Roosevelt. (Canada is not very different).
Line 144:		Line 144:
	The last chapter in the book (revised G.T.) is basic. It is a chapter of answers.		The last chapter in the book (revised G.T.) is basic. It is a chapter of answers.

	A unified trade union movement should have … […]		A unified trade union movement should have … […] {{English to type}}

	The peculiar fear of world destruction is gone, … […]		The peculiar fear of world destruction is gone, … […]

Santiago Pinault: /* Remarks */

2019-11-03T22:19:20Z

Remarks

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:19, 3 November 2019
Line 200:		Line 200:
	== Remarks ==		== Remarks ==
	=== "Trade and Markets" Book ===		=== "Trade and Markets" Book ===
	{{Page \|n°=20}}		{{Page \|n°=20}} We don't understand how the non-market economy is run, so we are attempting to show how a market-free economy works. How was …
	[[#mw-page-base\|↑]]		[[#mw-page-base\|↑]]

Santiago Pinault: /* Discussion of My Letter of Dec. 17/55 */

2019-11-03T01:38:03Z

Discussion of My Letter of Dec. 17/55

@@ Line 170: / Line 170: @@
 {{Page |n°=18}} <ref>"My letter", see [[From Abraham Rotstein (17 December 1955)|the letter of A. Rotstein]].</ref>Barbara Ward's discussion of the gold gap is utter nonsense.
-{{Page |n°=19}} Jews: one hears of chosenness more and more. Their guilt is not in the death of Jesus but with rejecting the teachings of Jesus which are superior. There are their own teachings but {{Page |n°=20}} why don't they claim it? The idea of love is frontally directed against selfishness. It is not clear what it is, but if you get rid of selfishness, you are happy, and these are the laws of inner life. You are happier if you forgive your enemy. If in your own heart you reject the truth of this directive it means you exclude yourself and are in the wrong gratuitously. In this interpretation of life is the hope of mankind.
+Nationalism is political, expansive, economic and lastly cultural.
-In Central Europe the Jewish community claimed that at the heart of Christianity there was nothing but a lie - that their behaviour was full of hypocrisy. But the teachings can be accepted. History runs on subtle distinctions. In America the Jewish Community is internalizing the gentile attitude. Civic behaviour of Americans is based on the church meeting. This is called American without knowing that American means the Christian way of life. It is a question of higher standards.
+The new technology can be turned to protecting the community against the effects of industrialization e.g. using the motor car to get away from town. […]
 == Remarks ==
 === "Trade and Markets" Book ===

Santiago Pinault: /* The U.S.A. */

2019-11-03T01:23:15Z

The U.S.A.

@@ Line 130: / Line 130: @@
 == The U.S.A. ==
-{{Page |n°=12}}
+The New Deal was characterized by political control.
 [[#mw-page-base|↑]]

Santiago Pinault: /* The Reality of Society */

2019-11-03T01:11:42Z

The Reality of Society

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:11, 3 November 2019
Line 45:		Line 45:
	What did man do with the recognition of the finiteness of his life? He had to take it. The form of his consciousness changed and he became a man. Man recognized that life was limited by physical death. The answer to this is that the content of human life doesn't exist without the knowledge of death. Existence could have no meaning without death. There is nothing to be done about it but resignation. Man is a moral being to whom everything has meaning.		What did man do with the recognition of the finiteness of his life? He had to take it. The form of his consciousness changed and he became a man. Man recognized that life was limited by physical death. The answer to this is that the content of human life doesn't exist without the knowledge of death. Existence could have no meaning without death. There is nothing to be done about it but resignation. Man is a moral being to whom everything has meaning.

	The New Testament has a second revelation − a second death. Man not only dies, but he can lose his soul any moment and die forever, by acting against his basic conscience and destroying himself. This is the discovery of the moral person. {{Page \|n°=6}} Each individual has a soul for himself puts him in a state of terrific peril. But there is no content to life to fear for one's soul. It is a real condition of freedom.		The New Testament has a second revelation − a second death. Man not only dies, but he can lose his soul any moment and die forever, by acting against his basic conscience and destroying himself. This is the discovery of the moral person.

			{{Page \|n°=6}} Each individual has a soul for himself puts him in a state of terrific peril. But there is no content to life to fear for one's soul. It is a real condition of freedom.

	All this comes from freeing things from the doctrinal: e.g. Jesus as the son of God. But what has been discovered is not a fairy tale. Every individual has a soul to lose. Jesus argued that if you dissolve your ego − love − if you get selfless, you can live − selfless is love. But the self was created by fear of everlasting extinction. The self is a disease − a parasite of life. It takes life away. Same as Buddha and Lao-tze, man cannot build a new life out of resignation.		All this comes from freeing things from the doctrinal: e.g. Jesus as the son of God. But what has been discovered is not a fairy tale. Every individual has a soul to lose. Jesus argued that if you dissolve your ego − love − if you get selfless, you can live − selfless is love. But the self was created by fear of everlasting extinction. The self is a disease − a parasite of life. It takes life away. Same as Buddha and Lao-tze, man cannot build a new life out of resignation.
Line 76:		Line 78:
	It is childish to think that a person follows his own conscience alone, since this is limited by the reality of society. It is like a child who doesn't know that life is finite - like a tribal member who has corporate and collective responsibility. Ultimately man is responsible.		It is childish to think that a person follows his own conscience alone, since this is limited by the reality of society. It is like a child who doesn't know that life is finite - like a tribal member who has corporate and collective responsibility. Ultimately man is responsible.

	It is the institutional bent that puts order into Polanyi's moral world.		{{Page \|n°=9}} It is the institutional bent that puts order into Polanyi's moral world.

	Christians rest their case on an inner absolute freedom. It doesn't mean that man is released from responsibility. (My question on the relation of Hobbes and Locke to the idea of the reality of society):<br />		Christians rest their case on an inner absolute freedom. It doesn't mean that man is released from responsibility. (My question on the relation of Hobbes and Locke to the idea of the reality of society):<br />
Line 101:		Line 103:
	Society should be thought of like ''Hamlet'' (ie the play).		Society should be thought of like ''Hamlet'' (ie the play).

	You don't start with the individual but with internalized values and mutual role expectations. Their relationship creates threads and the tissus of threads is society. This is <u>one</u> of the ways in which the reality of society is presented. The values of society are internalized in the personality structure and institutionalized in role expectations. The individual is socialized by the personality structure which is built on ………… Human relationships are based on the <span class="hand-written">mutual</span> role expectations. ~~[…]~~		You don't start with the individual but with internalized values and mutual role expectations. Their relationship creates threads and the tissus of threads is society. This is <u>one</u> of the ways in which the reality of society is presented. The values of society are internalized in the personality structure and institutionalized in role expectations. The individual is socialized by the personality structure which is built on ………… Human relationships are based on the <span class="hand-written">mutual</span> role expectations.

			These are much better terms than e.g. “social relations” built on the individual. These are consistently societal terms. For example in a market society, the values are success, efficiency etc. Personality is judged along these lines, and {{Page \|n°=11}} likewise role expectations e.g. with employers, employees. It personality structure and role expectations are in harmony, there is no strain everything would be perfect harmony, there is no strain, everything would be perfect and then is no point to the idea.

			But internalization needn't be permanent:
			1.) Internalized values may be wrong values, or they may not be completely internalized.<br />
			2.) Then if roles don't fit the circumstances e.g. a market person in a bureaucratic society, then you change either the role or the personality structure. (Then you can play about with this).

			Socialization need not be perfect, or fit a person's temperament. And who educates? Social controls and new elements are introduced to make things work.

			They might have used this theory on the economy very well, i.e. Parsons. Fromm might have used it too. (Role means simply a function, an occupation, character.) The thing that's new is not starting from the individual but a pattern.

			Polanyi's market theorem is simpler than Parson's and Parson's provides no place for the economy in society at all. Polanyi starts with the substantive, then how far it is embedded, and for the way it is instituted looks to forms of integration.

			Parsons never gets beyond the economic system in society and is much more complicated than e.g. the ideas of “fictitious” commodities and embeddedness. Parsons is incomplete and confusing but Polanyi agrees with ideas of personality structure and role expectations.

			Parsons has another general sociology - the requirements of any society or institution, put in abstract terms. This {{Page \|n°=12}} is very much general and doesn't restrict itself as to how society functions given certain values and motives, but how is any human group related to maintenance of its values. This is too general to apply and nothing comes of it. (adaptation, integration, structure, etc.) There are four requirements of any social system. But to say e.g. human economy, social system (?) is so vague that nothing comes of it. The general theory of any kind of social system is of no interest.

	~~{{Page \|n°=11}} […]~~		The reality of society is the background for the realization of man's inner self-sets the conditions.

	~~{{Page \|n°=12}}~~ An English philosopher said to Polanyi of the G.T. that P. was able to link up the economics and politics of the era with the actual facts.		An English philosopher said to Polanyi of the G.T. that P. was able to link up the economics and politics of the era with the actual facts.
	* We must recognize the inherent limitation of anarchistic freedom.		* We must recognize the inherent limitation of anarchistic freedom.
	* We must waive the efficiency principle (e.g. the Russian can offer foreign at low interest rates, good terms).		* We must waive the efficiency principle (e.g. the Russian can offer foreign at low interest rates, good terms).

	[[#mw-page-base\|↑]]		Man is a social animal and must accede to society at vital points e.g. crime, emergency, c.f. Rousseau - volonté. Individual deviance should however be allowed as shunting process for change. Otherwise, if everyone was the same there would be no adaptation or change to changing conditions. [[#mw-page-base\|↑]]

	== The U.S.A. ==		== The U.S.A. ==

Santiago Pinault: /* The Current Crisis */

2019-11-03T00:49:47Z

The Current Crisis

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:49, 3 November 2019
Line 24:		Line 24:

	== The Current Crisis ==		== The Current Crisis ==
	P.'s outlook is optimistic. No imminent danger of destruction of mankind. One shouldn't feel paralyzed. ~~[…]~~		P.'s outlook is optimistic. No imminent danger of destruction of mankind. One shouldn't feel paralyzed. There were 3 sources of destruction in the period 1945-55:<br />
			1.) Atom Bomb. <span class="hand-written">Science created the peril of man's suicide total)</span><br />
			2.) U.S. - Russia (vacuum.) <span class="hand-written">polarity of power created fateful imb{___}</span><br />
			3.) Asian revolt. <span class="hand-written">created fateful tensions</span><br />

	{{Page \|n°=4}} In this period ~~… […]~~		{{Page \|n°=4}} In this period each one had reinforced the other 160-fold. But having passed the climax each is hindering the other two. Mankind was in the same boat for the last 10 years, in danger of being destroyed and is now developing a common fate, - partly due to Russian achievements linked with her determination to avoid war. (Although the Russians had their own Hiroshima and Auschwitz crimes).

	[[#mw-page-base\|↑]]		P. is under no illusions about the ease with which peace and freedom can be maintained in a technological civilization. It is not simply a matter of goodwill - of wishing it. [[#mw-page-base\|↑]]

	== The Reality of Society ==		== The Reality of Society ==

Santiago Pinault: /* Russia */

2019-11-03T00:41:47Z

Russia

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:41, 3 November 2019
Line 17:		Line 17:

	== Russia ==		== Russia ==
	{{Page \|n°=3}} The Russian “1984” ~~… Tolstoy~~		{{Page \|n°=3}} The Russian “1984” position is gone - thawed away, and the G.T. is back. (Can forget about '45-55). Offers no prophecies with respect to Russia - might change in 3 years to another emphasis of life. Russia would have been in terrible danger if the 5 years plans had failed.

	~~[…]~~		(From memory:) Since the Chinese have assumed leadership in Asia, the Russians are turning back to show the West an origine. For a long time under Stalin their position was in between East and West. Russia 50 years ago was the most advanced country in Europe - e.g. Tolstoy and Dostoievski's work went far beyond anything the West produced.

	[[#mw-page-base\|↑]]		Her problems will now be the same as ours. [[#mw-page-base\|↑]]

	== The Current Crisis ==		== The Current Crisis ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:39, 2 December 2019
Line 142:		Line 142:
	The Federal governement ran foreign policy, defence, and army, the courts and finance and treasury, but not industry, commerce or education. Federal power is entirely new since Roosevelt. (Canada is not very different).		The Federal governement ran foreign policy, defence, and army, the courts and finance and treasury, but not industry, commerce or education. Federal power is entirely new since Roosevelt. (Canada is not very different).

	The last chapter in the book (revised G.T.) is basic. It is a chapter of answers.		{{Page \|n°=14}} The last chapter in the book (revised G.T.) is basic. It is a chapter of answers.

	A unified trade union movement should have ~~… […] {{English~~ to ~~type}}~~		A unified trade union movement should have a constitutional safeguard for the individual - the extension of habeas corpus to the individual - the appeal to the courts in the last place. This is completely reliable as in America the Federal court is incorruptible (doesn't work in the States). (as long as the law has the support of opinion).

	The peculiar fear of world destruction is gone, ~~… […]~~		The peculiar fear of world destruction is gone, and the problem is how to get along. The West must pull up its socks: Managerial standards must be raised further with the conviction that the service idea is true. Unless employment is stabilized and costs are cut, the system will be replaced by public ownership. The managerial interests of the corporation as a public body must be served. This is different from the capitalist interest. Trade unions should have long-term arrangements e.g. G.A.W. If the system breaks down it will be taken over by the state. These are the conditions of our competition with Russia.

	The capitalist system was not primarily for profit but for status - money gives you status. ~~[…]~~		The capitalist system was not primarily for profit but for status - money gives you status. Thus our taxation system may be so high as to be confiscatory, at the same time the capitalist class is assured the highest standard life by being able to deduct from taxable income items for a high standard - i.e. expense accounts are institutionalized, and he gets as his status right away of life he alone has. This is not cheating on taxes but using the tax law…. At the same time corporation profits remain undistributed and are terrifically big.

	Competition seems to be very real,		Competition seems to be very real, even when there are only 2 or 3 firms, - they are fighting for prestige. It does not depend on the number of firms sharing the market.

	The working class is not threatened by starvation (e.g. G.A.W.) and the capitalist ~~… […]~~		The working class is not threatened by starvation (e.g. G.A.W.) and the capitalist can't work for profit (confiscating taxes) but for a standard of life which goes with his status. Thus the classical motivation, the fear of starvation and profit, is weakened, but the system doesn't collapse, not at all. We have a situation in which the public relations and status interest of the corporation, the interest of the union and the interest of the government in public welfare have hardly any limit to which they can influence the economic process. This is happening today.

	The Marxist thesis is that the government in Washington is only representative of the ruling class. How with Eisenhower and a business ~~… […]~~		The Marxist thesis is that the government in Washington is only representative of the ruling class. How with Eisenhower and a business government this is so, but he dropped the anti-democratic elements and kept the democratic ones - the shameless sellout of natural gas was vetoed. The Federal government is now an independent grass roots power. The thesis originated by the Marxists held under the gold standard where the political government represented the ruling class: The banking system system was in charge of foreign exchange and the giltedge market. They could by their de facto constitutional position veto actions affecting the stability of currency and the public debt.

	This ceased after the passing of the gold standard. This is a democratic system and people get what they want, e.g. the policy toward Russia is a people's policy - the trade unions ~~… […]~~		This ceased after the passing of the gold standard. This is a democratic system and people get what they want, e.g. the policy toward Russia is a people's policy - the trade unions are extremely anti-Russian. The upper class are less anti-Russian than the trade unions.

	{{Page \|n°=16}}		{{Page \|n°=16}} (U. of Michigan '94 survey). The explanation of this is that to a poorer person his "way of life" is a much bigger part of his life than to the wealthy person. The poorer really enjoy their way of life and hate the idea of change. There has been a great influx of education and literature to the working class. P. has no illusion about the actual working of our system but it is democratic. [[#mw-page-base\|↑]]

	[[#mw-page-base\|↑]]

	== The Market and a Theory of Nationalism ==		== The Market and a Theory of Nationalism ==
	~~{{Page \|n°=16}}~~ (My question on their relationship)		(My question on their relationship)

	See books by C. Hayes, “The Age of Materialism”, for a theory of nationhood. For the bourgeois it is language and literature.		See books by C. Hayes, “The Age of Materialism”, for a theory of nationhood. For the bourgeois it is language and literature.

	The factor of the credit system: it is the one currency which makes the unites nation today. ~~[…]~~		The factor of the credit system: it is the one currency which makes the unites nation today. Liberal theory says "currency is nothing". Ricardo and Marx queered the pitch: "money is only a token of gold". But money is not only a taken of gold, but <u>sui generi</u>, a means of political power that has nothing to do with gold.

	The criticism of the gold standard was Keynesian. No one wants to go back to the gold standard because employment is thus subordinated to the level of currency.(very crucial factor). ~~[…]~~		The criticism of the gold standard was Keynesian. No one wants to go back to the gold standard because employment is thus subordinated to the level of currency.(very crucial factor). Nationalist movements in Asia are industrializing and want to remain in control.

	In the 19th century, England established two things, Central banh and parliaments, which guaranteed its spending. The bank was to manipulate the price system in order to maintain the exchange. The only thing which happened all over the world was the {{Page \|n°=17}} introduction of money as a means of exchange, and the linking up of local and world markets.		In the 19th century, England established two things, Central banh and parliaments, which guaranteed its spending. The bank was to manipulate the price system in order to maintain the exchange. The only thing which happened all over the world was the {{Page \|n°=17}} introduction of money as a means of exchange, and the linking up of local and world markets.
Line 175:		Line 173:
	Can we say that nationalism was the 'result' of the market? (my question)		Can we say that nationalism was the 'result' of the market? (my question)

	We cannot say ~~… […]~~		We cannot say that nationalism was a result of the market. There may be other reasons. Method is important here and we should link only that which needs linking, using no more assumptions than are needed.

	Nationalism may be predominantly a force for change and ~~industrialisation~~. ~~[…]~~		Nationalism may be predominantly a force for change and industrialization. With communism, nationalism, folk-dances etc. were on anti-Western cultural movement accompanying rapid industrialization. There may be many reactions to industrialism, e.g. cf. Communist Satellite countries were urged to be non-nationalist.

	There is an almost incredible weakness in Canadian nationalism ~~… […]~~		There is an almost incredible weakness in Canadian nationalism namely that there is no effective theory, of it. The formulation of one might disrupt the country on account of the French. e.g. At a recent Couchiching conferences, one speaker said: "Canada comes from a broken home, and therefore, he added, let us forget the past. A nation not looking at its past is an anomaly to all nations. A theory of nationalism refers might sum up a nation's fate: what it should look like, language (bilingual or not), education, children.

	There are internationalist nations (Swiss, America & the USSR) and even a national (Austrians) ones.		There are internationalist nations (Swiss, America & the USSR) and even a national (Austrians) ones.
Line 190:		Line 188:
	Nationalism is political, expansive, economic and lastly cultural.		Nationalism is political, expansive, economic and lastly cultural.

	The new technology can be turned to protecting the community against the effects of industrialization e.g. using the motor car to get away from town. ~~[…]~~		The new technology can be turned to protecting the community against the effects of industrialization e.g. using the motor car to get away from town. (Neutralizing the process of urbanization)

	Suburbia: Women have nothing to do nothing to do but club around, and the non-conformist is ruthlessly eliminated, while conforming to that level is unbearable. There is already a move back to town demanding new houses and isolation from each other.		Suburbia: Women have nothing to do nothing to do but club around, and the non-conformist is ruthlessly eliminated, while conforming to that level is unbearable. There is already a move back to town demanding new houses and isolation from each other.

	Possibilities of administrative ordering ~~… […]~~		Possibilities of administrative ordering of the economy (instead of the market answer to the machine p.3): I the early 19th cty there was no possibility of the state ordering the economy. How could the community undertake risk-bearing with tax money? e.g. to create an industrial proletariat it to take up work in the factories?

	~~Why~~ the market economy? ~~- There is no agreed answer~~. ~~[…]~~

	… used at first because cotton was expensive. It had to be brought {{Page \|n°=19}} from Egypt or America. Thick cotton was produced as a luxury for rich ladies.		Why the market economy? - There is no agreed answer. The most general principle is that if machines were accepted into production it had to be by private capital. But why were they used in that way at all? Machines were invented previously and used for games or military purposes. Once they were used for <u>producing goods</u>, they gave rise to the market economy. But why, for example, produce more shoes, and sell them at home a cheaper price? Who would think of such a crazy thing? The guild shoemaker would chase you out of the community. But selling cloth off to the West Indies - that was fine. Wool was used at first because cotton was expensive. It had to be brought {{Page \|n°=19}} from Egypt or America. Thick cotton was produced as a luxury for rich ladies.

	It is an irrational cultural factor which is untraceable (i.e. adoption of machines) and we are unable to say why. No one in parliament knew in the 1810's what was going on in Manchester.		It is an irrational cultural factor which is untraceable (i.e. adoption of machines) and we are unable to say why. No one in parliament knew in the 1810's what was going on in Manchester.

	There was no working class at the beginning. ~~[…]~~		There was no working class at the beginning. You couldn't buy any workers for the machines. Where could you take him from? He stood in the villages. They had to take women from Ireland, wild people, and children from the poorhouse. They lived in nondescript hovels. The British working class had to be created. But with an unlimited market, they could be paid good wages.

	You need private capital for machinery and there was no capitalist class either. Devices of home-workers were cheap machines. ~~[…]~~		You need private capital for machinery and there was no capitalist class either. Devices of home-workers were cheap machines. The entrepeneurial class was also new and was brought into being.

	This shows up the class theory which operates only with existing classes. Every important event in economic history resulted in the creation of new classes from old. Every fifty years in Europe, you have new classes coming up in a definite way (Pirenne). Thus the class theory explains so little.		This shows up the class theory which operates only with existing classes. Every important event in economic history resulted in the creation of new classes from old. Every fifty years in Europe, you have new classes coming up in a definite way (Pirenne). Thus the class theory explains so little.
Line 218:		Line 214:
	== Remarks ==		== Remarks ==
	=== "Trade and Markets" Book ===		=== "Trade and Markets" Book ===
	{{Page \|n°=20}} We don't understand how the non-market economy is run, so we are attempting to show how a market-free economy works. How was …		{{Page \|n°=20}} We don't understand how the non-market economy is run, so we are attempting to show how a market-free economy works. How was the economic process instituted? We know only one way - the market. Unless we can show an alternative, there is no point to the discussion.
	[[#mw-page-base\|↑]]
			We have shown that through such terms as administrated trade, gift trade, equivalencies, port of trade, etc. We now have hold of these terms. [[#mw-page-base\|↑]]

	=== Sievers ===		=== Sievers ===
			His introduction to economics has a few good chapters on the market, but it doesn't contain the substantive theorem in that {{Page \|n°=21}} sense.[[#mw-page-base\|↑]]
	[[#mw-page-base\|↑]]

	=== New Book ===		=== New Book ===
	~~{{Page \|n°=21}}~~ May be e.g. [[The Livelihood of Man]]. Introduction will discuss e.g. What to our generation appear as unique cross-roads: freedom vs. bureaucracy, planning vs. market methods - will then be recognized as topical versions of recurrent human alternatives. (citing various cultures and the substantive economy?		May be e.g. [[The Livelihood of Man]]. Introduction will discuss e.g. What to our generation appear as unique cross-roads: freedom vs. bureaucracy, planning vs. market methods - will then be recognized as topical versions of recurrent human alternatives. (citing various cultures and the substantive economy?

	Bureaucratic top-level and freedom on lower level.<br />		Bureaucratic top-level and freedom on lower level.<br />