Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 11:15:26 -0800 (PST)
From: mj <mjlistservs-AT-yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: AUT: Dependency theory (take 2)


I can't for the life of me figure out why this one email account mis-formats my replies to this one listserv. Here's my previous message with little ">"s inserted manually:

>andrew robinson wrote:

>"it considers the spatial aspect of 
>capitalism as a world-system, rather than from the
>temporal perspective 
>of 'backwardness', 'development' etc. I especially
>liked the idea of 
>'underdevelopment' as a product of capitalism, that
>development 
>produces underdevelopment or 'dependent-development'."

>Yeah, this is what makes it attractive to me as well,
>as a Deleuzian. I wasn't expecting this idea to take
>off the way it has on the list when I introduced it
>against Sphinx. 

Didn't it actually come up when Sphinx made a comment about something "sound[ing] like the decadence theory", which someone then misinterpreted as being a botched reference to dependency theory? That's how I remember it going, and I thought it was pretty funny at the time, especially considering that debate would have been a lot more fruitful if it turned to debate over the decadence theory. I could go through the archives and try to track down the point at which this bizarre diversion began, but I'm supposed to be alienating my labor, so if you don't believe me go look for yourselves.

You know, the decadence theory:

http://www.geocities.com/aufheben2/auf_2_dec.html

MJ



		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
 All your favorites on one personal page – Try My Yahoo!

--- StripMime Warning --  MIME attachments removed --- 
This message may have contained attachments which were removed.

Sorry, we do not allow attachments on this list.

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- 
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---


     --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---