Suchergebnisse

FROM THE REVIEW: "The term 'political economy' in Nitzan and Bichler's work gives the book away. It is neither economics nor political science but flow-of-consciousness Marxoid rhetoric. The authors could not pass a quiz in first-year economics, and I doubt they would do well in freshman political science either. Instead, they pack their book with the usual leftist pseudo-thoughts. . . . The Global Political Economy of Israel is full of baseless sweeping generalities unsupported by any scientific evidence at all. . . .To the extent that there really is a 'dominant class' in Israel, it consists of yuppie leftists who vote for the left-wing political parties, in other words people very much like the two authors themselves. . . . The book is true to the genre of radical 'scholarship' in believing that nothing is so powerfully analytic as the invention of a nice polysyllable. . . . Such pomposity, mixed with a few macroeconomic structural equations with some Greek letters that the authors clearly do not understand, is meant to convey the impression of depth and scholarship. Could the authors even read a balance of payments table?"

FROM THE REVIEW: "Throwing stones at a glass house is fine if the thrower does not himself sit in one. On this the authors fail miserably. . . . The authors' stumbles in matters of fact are legend. . . . Strangely, the authors never mention the one comprehensive analysis of Israel's political economy . . . [namely, my own book] The Political Economy of Israel: From Ideology to Stagnation, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1994. . . ."

FROM THE ARTICLE: The French Revolution changed the world. In the new order, the masters no longer need Monsieur Fouche and the thought police. They don't need guillotines to clip brains and scissors to censor pamphlets. They don't need strategic-studies institutes to manage oppression and navigate conflict. Instead, they prefer to subsidize 'cultural pluralism' and 'critical studies', support centres for democracy and privatization, and promote civil-society networks and global NGOs. They are no longer afraid of words. Or so we are told.

FROM THE REVIEW: Here is a quote from their paper: "Political economy, liberal as well as Marxist, stands on three key foundations: (I) a separation between economics and politics; (II) a Galilean/Cartesian/Newtonian mechanical understanding of the economy; and (III) a value theory that breaks the economy into two spheres – real and nominal – and that uses the quantities of the real sphere to explain the appearances of the nominal one." I think Bichler and Nitzan are on the right track in a number of ways but I still do have some key disagreements with them. To illustrate these disagreements I will re-write the statement above in what I regard as the more correct form. "Conventional economics stands on three key foundations: (I) a separation between economics and politics; (II) a Cartesian/Newtonian mechanical understanding of the economy; and (III) a value theory that breaks the economy into two spheres – real and nominal – that uses the quantities of the real sphere to explain the appearances of the nominal one (ideological justification) and that then uses the quantities of the nominal sphere to manage those of the real sphere (as an instrumental, formalised reason system for the purpose of deriving, in a sense, quantised values for the real)." To explain these changes. . . .

הספר "ממעורבות ממשלתית לכלכלת שוק", אלבום הניצחון של השיטה הכלכלית-פוליטית השלטת, הפך למרכיב מרכזי בדיאטה של פרחי בתי הספר לכלכלה The book "From Government Intervention to Market Economics," is a standard staple in the diet of Israeli economics students. A victory album for the dominant economic ideology, it rewrites history as Rockefeller would have liked it.

FROM THE REVIEW: Shimshon Bichler and Jonathan Nitzan are Israeli political economists. Together they've created a thought-provoking power theory of capitalism and theory of differential accumulation. The theory is not "pie-in-the-sky," but is based in their analysis of the political economy of wars, globalization, etc. The theory is not something new, however. It reflects the works of Thorstein Veblen, Karl Marx, Michał Kalecki, Cornelius Castoriadis, and Lewis Mumford. Considering the foci of their research and the works they use as a starting point, neither Bichler nor Nitzan can be called economists, in the way that identifier is used today.

The Confederate Graves Survey Archive of the Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans consists of surveys of cemeteries throughout Texas, and portions of Oklahoma and New Mexico. The surveys document the interment of Confederate States of America military veterans. United States of America (Union) veterans, as well as able-bodied men at the time of the Civil War, are also documented. 13 boxes entitled "Grave Surveys" contain grave surveys listed county-by-county, 3 boxes of "Unit Files" list surveyed individuals by their military unit. Finally, 17 boxes contain "Veteran Files" that document each veteran by name in "last name, first name, middle initial" format. An index that cross-references each of the collection series (Grave Surveys, Unit Files, and Veteran Files) is included, as are institutions to surveyors on how and what to document while conducting surveys. ; Oak Hill Cemetery #284, Lampasas, Lampasas County, Texas | Veterans Interred: Clark, J. H. ; Colorado City Cemetery #872, Colorado City, Mitchell County, Texas | Veterans Interred: Avery, Peter E.

The Confederate Graves Survey Archive of the Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans consists of surveys of cemeteries throughout Texas, and portions of Oklahoma and New Mexico. The surveys document the interment of Confederate States of America military veterans. United States of America (Union) veterans, as well as able-bodied men at the time of the Civil War, are also documented. 13 boxes entitled "Grave Surveys" contain grave surveys listed county-by-county, 3 boxes of "Unit Files" list surveyed individuals by their military unit. Finally, 17 boxes contain "Veteran Files" that document each veteran by name in "last name, first name, middle initial" format. An index that cross-references each of the collection series (Grave Surveys, Unit Files, and Veteran Files) is included, as are institutions to surveyors on how and what to document while conducting surveys. ; Pleasant Hill Cemetery #5, Nolanville, Bell County, Texas | Veterans Interred: Spratt, Elam McKnight. ; Hillcrest Cemetery #6, Temple, Bell County, Texas | Veterans Interred: Carothers, Sim D. ; Hillcrest Cemetery #6, Temple, Bell County, Texas | Veterans Interred: Crenshaw, W. T. ; N. Belton Cemetery #1, Belton, Bell County, Texas | Veterans Interred: Holliday, Andrew J. ; Abilene Cemetery #138, Abilene, Taylor County, Texas | Veterans Interred: Stinckcomb, J. D. ; Rehobeth Cemetery #768, Hunt County, Texas | Veterans Interred: Pyle, Thos. Jefferson.

Rockefeller's global reach -- from the University of Chicago to the Holy Land. FROM THE ARTICLE: John D. Rockefeller knew a thing or two about power. His Standard Oil of New Jersey became a blueprint for corporate centralization. He pioneered new methods of stock rigging and financial mischief. He destroyed competition wherever he could and set new standards for industrial sabotage and union busting. He manipulated the tastes of "rational consumers" and made "policymakers" dance to his tune. He used violence to expropriate from indigenous Americans their resource-rich lands, and religion to pacify their resistance. He harnessed the U. S. military to impose American "free trade" on the rest of the world. Raw power made Rockefeller and his family enormously rich. And yet, to the end of his life, John D. insisted that his best investment ever was the $45 million he donated to rebuild the Baptist University of Chicago. Rockefeller saw Chicago as a religious asset. The philanthropy helped silence his critics in this world and pave his way to heaven in the next. It bought him the loyalty of spiritual shepherds and academic retainers, all eager to sing the praise of Standard Oil and glorify its devout owner. But in the long run the biggest yield came from the university's department of economics. [. . .] A FEW WORDS ON THE HISTORY OF THIS ARTICLE: The paper was originally commissioned in August 2003 by the Journal of Cold War Studies. Following our explicit inquiry, the journal confirmed that our text would be published "as is." With this assurance, we submitted the paper in January 2004. The paper was longer than the journal's standard review. We explicitly drew attention to the extra length and explained why a longer article was necessary given the subject matter. The journal accepted the review and scheduled its publication to the Fall of 2004. But then the editor, Mark Kramer, had a change of heart. Having read our paper, he must have realized he had made a big mistake. This type of criticism had no place in his respectable journal. He began evasive actions. Without notice, our paper was postponed to the next issue, and then to the following one. We protested the censorship. Kramer assured us there was none. There was simply a long backlog of reviews, he said. Our paper would be published as is and without editorial intervention. Finally, in April 2005, the truth came out. We were notified that the paper would not be published at all. It was simply . . . too long. We could, if we wanted to, cut the article in half. Or, alternatively, we could enlarge it into a review essay and re-submit it to the journal's referees. But then the Journal would have to re-consider it. . . .