Markets, Planning and Democracy

Markets, Planning and Democracy

Essays after the Collapse of Communism

New Thinking in Political Economy series

David L. Prychitko

The essays contained herein span over a decade and reflect David Prychitko’s thinking about the role of the market system, and its relation to planning and democratic processes. The collection consists of previously published and unpublished articles written not only for economists but also for an interdisciplinary audience.

Chapter 6: Marx, Postmodernism and Self-Management: Reply to Abell

David L. Prychitko

Subjects: economics and finance, austrian economics

Extract

6. Marx, postmodernism and selfmanagement: reply to Abell* I used the word ‘post-modern’ once in Marxism and Workers’ SelfManagement. The Essential Tension (Prychitko, 1991), in the Introduction. What a mistake. I hadn’t realized it was open season, and that I’d possibly catch the attention of trigger-happy anti-postmodernists. Peter Abell (1995) is skeptical of postmodernism, and he seems on the prowl, at least in this review, to expose the follies of post-modern philosophy as related to self-management, his area of expertise. He seizes on that one word, also notes my ‘flirtation with a number of post-something or others’ (1995, p.342) (I used the words ‘post-Marxist’ and ‘post-industrial’ once each), and unfortunately charges after the wrong animal. Having only been grazed, I’d like to respond to Abell so that this doesn’t become a real nuisance. INTERPRETING MARX: FROM MODERN AND POST-MODERN TO UNITY AND TENSION The first sentence of Abell’s review reads: ‘the time has come for a postmodern interpretation of Marx, one that helps explain the limits to his rational humanism’ (1995, p.341). This is supposed to be a quotation from my book, but I myself wrote: ‘The time has come for a post-modern interpretation of Marx, one that helps explain the limits to his radical humanism’ (Prychitko, 1991, xiii). The emphasis was in the original passage. So was the word ‘radical’ (not ‘rational’). Abell casts me as some kind of postmodernist and antirationalist, but he makes two mistakes here: he misquotes and misrepresents me. Although I might now be charged...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information