This is something of an aside, but do you have any recommendation for works on economics? you've mentioned Carlota Perez, Christopher Freeman on Kondratiev cycles, are there others?
Definitely gotta reiterate those innovation school economists like Perez and especially Freeman, though it's worth reading Schumpeter in conjunction with them, since it's a key influence. Hilfdering is a big influence for me too, and Baran and Sweezy.
thank you! my own orientation is toward anwar shaikh, who I've read a little, who claims to put himself against sweezy & hilferding, considering the both of them to be more neoclassical. part of the divergence is in considering gold to still be the money commodity & something that cannot be imposed or suspended by central banks—which I understand is a huge important thing for you. I suppose that shaikh would see the economic as exceeding the grasp of the political, as that without a sovereign. nevertheless he's interested in schumpeterianism & has a central place for k-waves
a friend of mine has a take that shaikh's radicality is refusing even under "communism" a kind of economic planning (he's kinda close to karatani here I feel, if you see his footnote on it in transcritique, on the identity of classical & neoclassical economics' dream of planning).
very curious how you would see the difference between your orientation & that of shaikh—he's definitely much more of a ricardian, and hence you could argue that he's too victorian, maybe.
"Words themselves function the same way: they are capable of being broken down into their most base and primordial roots and arranged in a constellation of associated meaning with their linguistic cousins. The structuring of language components into words conceals genealogical chasms, the wandering movement of thought itself."
It's telling that a lot of history's big breakthroughs came from some crazy guy sitting in his room at night thinking about the most basis and primordial questions.
A-la-Hegel in Jena, At night in Jena, between 1801 and 1806, as the cannons of Napoleon approached and the Holy Roman Empire crumbled, sat in his room pondering the central problem of all Western philosophy since the death of God and the fragmentation of man. His question was vast, but it can be summarized like this:
How can a fractured, alienated world return to unity—without erasing the freedom that fracture has made possible?
Such questions are important, they hit at the root.
This is something of an aside, but do you have any recommendation for works on economics? you've mentioned Carlota Perez, Christopher Freeman on Kondratiev cycles, are there others?
Definitely gotta reiterate those innovation school economists like Perez and especially Freeman, though it's worth reading Schumpeter in conjunction with them, since it's a key influence. Hilfdering is a big influence for me too, and Baran and Sweezy.
thank you! my own orientation is toward anwar shaikh, who I've read a little, who claims to put himself against sweezy & hilferding, considering the both of them to be more neoclassical. part of the divergence is in considering gold to still be the money commodity & something that cannot be imposed or suspended by central banks—which I understand is a huge important thing for you. I suppose that shaikh would see the economic as exceeding the grasp of the political, as that without a sovereign. nevertheless he's interested in schumpeterianism & has a central place for k-waves
a friend of mine has a take that shaikh's radicality is refusing even under "communism" a kind of economic planning (he's kinda close to karatani here I feel, if you see his footnote on it in transcritique, on the identity of classical & neoclassical economics' dream of planning).
very curious how you would see the difference between your orientation & that of shaikh—he's definitely much more of a ricardian, and hence you could argue that he's too victorian, maybe.
"Words themselves function the same way: they are capable of being broken down into their most base and primordial roots and arranged in a constellation of associated meaning with their linguistic cousins. The structuring of language components into words conceals genealogical chasms, the wandering movement of thought itself."
It's telling that a lot of history's big breakthroughs came from some crazy guy sitting in his room at night thinking about the most basis and primordial questions.
A-la-Hegel in Jena, At night in Jena, between 1801 and 1806, as the cannons of Napoleon approached and the Holy Roman Empire crumbled, sat in his room pondering the central problem of all Western philosophy since the death of God and the fragmentation of man. His question was vast, but it can be summarized like this:
How can a fractured, alienated world return to unity—without erasing the freedom that fracture has made possible?
Such questions are important, they hit at the root.
hey, you're that author of "grungy accelerationism", aren't you?
I am! Some ancient history there, I think that essay was like a decade ago now