Tapia

REVIEW

Adam’s Fallacy—A Guide to Economic Theology, by Dun- can Foley. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press/Harvard University Press, 2006. $25.95, cloth. 288 pages.

José Tapia

I enjoyed reading Adam’s Fallacy as used a different approach. Adam’s much as if I were reading a book of Fallacy has almost no citations. fiction. This is an excellent book Foley tells us in his own words how on the ideas of economists and the earlier and modern economists have way they developed over the last understood and explained economic three centuries. Though Foley says problems. We are told in the preface in the preface that he intended this that the book is “an attempt to ex- book as a general presentation of plain the core ideas of economists” economic ideas for the cultivated from the point of view of the author, reader, it is likely that most of his and not “a book on the history of readers will come from the group he economic thought proper,” though mentions in his dedication, “For my its historical perspective is “a happy colleagues.” way to organize a complex set of It is likely that some but not many ideas into a coherent and understand- noneconomists will read this book. able story.” The reader is warned that In spite of its being a great presen- this is Foley’s “own take on econom- tation of interesting material, the ics,” in which he exploits “the great historical arrangement and the depth figures in the history of political with which theories are presented economy shamelessly” for his own will dissuade many lay readers from ends (p. xii). wading far beyond the first pages. Foley begins with a discussion Those with a serious interest in social of the classical economists, Smith knowledge, however, will probably and Malthus, as well as Ricardo. The make it to the end. title Adam’s Fallacy is a kind of pun, In books on the history of eco- linking the concept of foundation to nomic thought, it is common to cite two Adams, one from the garden of old authors profusely,1 but Foley has Eden and the other from the Scot-

JOSÉ TAPIA teaches social science at the University of Michigan. He thanks Paul Mattick and Jackie Murray for comments and criticism.

Challenge, vol. 51, no. 2, March/April 2008, pp. 110–120. © 2008 M.E. Sharpe, Inc. All rights reserved. ISSN 0577–5132 / 2008 $9.50 + 0.00. 110 Challenge/March–April 2008 DOI: 10.2753/0577–5132510209 Reviews tish school of political economy. economists who, for instance, deny The illustration on the dust jacket the possibility of improving the hu- reinforces the image, superimposing man condition through public pol- the face of Adam Smith on a bitten icy. There are some positive aspects apple. of Malthus, however, that are often Foley goes into great detail on the overlooked. On one hand, he was the ideas that have come into present- first author in political economy to day economic thought from Adam clearly articulate the issue of natural Smith. For Foley, as for many oth- bounds to human society. This puts ers, the most important idea of this Malthus in direct connection with Smithian legacy is that of the invis- modern ecological views, generally ible hand, which assumes or rather critical of capitalism, although it asserts the emergence of acceptable also aligns him with quite different and efficient common-good out- right-wing currents that are properly comes from the ethically question- referred to as neo-Malthusian. able pursuits of private interests in On the other hand, in spite of the market. This “separation of an Malthus’s reactionary stance re- economic sphere,” says Foley, “with garding the possibility of human its presumed specific principles of progress, he did explain disease and organization, from the much messier, death in terms of biology and natu- less determinate, and morally more ral causes, rather than attributing problematic issues of politics, social them to the Almighty’s will. The conflict, and values, is the founda- view that disease and death were tion of political economy and eco- directly determined by the Divinity nomics as an intellectual discipline. was still quite extended in Malthus’s Thus to my mind Adam’s Fallacy is time—just twenty-five years before the kernel of political economy and his birth, Johann Süssmilch had economics” (p. xiii). We see from published in Germany his celebrated the start that a major component of Proof for a God-Given Order to the Foley’s argument is the ethical inad- Changes in Male and Female Births equacy of those schools of economic and Deaths and the Reproduction of thought that agree with the basic Human Populations. For Malthus, the Smithian principle that the pursuit way nature is set (by God) makes it of individual economic interest is impossible to improve society by, not ethically wrong because it leads say, reducing famine, but it was not to common good. his view that each death and birth is On Malthus, Foley says one of his decided by God alone. Surprisingly major contributions was to bring little attention is paid in Adam’s Fal- mathematical reasoning to economic lacy to environmental issues—in this thought (p. 48), but overall, Foley is respect Foley is a true follower of the not sympathetic to him. It is indeed tradition in economics and does not difficult to be sympathetic to Mal- take much advantage of Malthus to thus, unless you are one of those discuss such matters.

Challenge/March–April 2008 111 Tapia

After the classical economists, nalities” and “opens the door to Foley moves on to Marx—I will re- widespread government interven- turn to this later—and then in the tion” (p. 172). This may be true from last hundred pages of the book to a theoretical point of view—for in- marginalism, Veblen, Keynes, and stance, one that makes a fine distinc- modern neoclassical views. Though tion between the neoclassical and perhaps this is too much material Austrian schools in economics—but to be treated in just a third of the it seems to be a biased assessment if book, it is clear that Foley’s interest is it refers to mainstream economics. much more focused on old political From Friedman to Greenspan to Mc- economy than on recent economics, Closkey (not to mention economists perhaps because he believes that, in from other countries), the economic the end, not much was contributed profession has been deeply commit- by the marginalist revolution. ted to the rejection of government Some figures worthy of discussion intervention. Even the major tenets are ignored. Nicholas Georgescu- of Keynesianism are viewed with Roegen, for instance, is a major suspicion in economics depart- author and an isolated figure in ments controlled by neoclassicals. modern economics who challenged And economists like Paul Krugman, economic orthodoxy from angles Joseph Stiglitz, and Amartya Sen, that were almost wholly ignored who to some extent disagree with the by the classics, including a strong neoliberal consensus—though in no concern with the real meaning of sense question capitalism—are often “wealth” and the relation between considered by mainstream econom- nature and humanity. That he is ics as vicious leftists. (On the occa- not even mentioned in a book in sion of Amartya Sen’s receiving the which we find such names as Lytton Nobel Prize in economics, I heard Strachey, Oskar Lange, and Enrico the famous theoretician of interna- Barone seems very much related tional trade Jagdish Bhagwati saying to Foley’s view that environmental on National Public Radio that Sen’s problems present no Gordian knot interventionist views on economic for the present economic system to policy are to be repudiated because solve. For instance, he believes that they help perpetuate poverty.) the extension of property rights to In a review of Adam’s Fallacy, environmental assets and some tin- Robert Solow criticized the book for kering with pollution markets can lacking “mechanics.”3 For Solow, lead to a feasible solution for global economists must be much more warming.2 concerned with specific “mecha- Foley asserts that modern neoclas- nisms” (such as those that explain sical economics “is not committed the price of beer or the balance of to laissez-faire policy: it supports payments) than with big issues like intervention in cases of monopoly, “the future of capitalism.” To dis- incomplete information, and exter- cuss in depth this idea of Solow’s

112 Challenge/March–April 2008 Reviews would require going into what is garbage. That is inherited knowledge the utility of economists for so- from Francis Edgeworth and other ciety, or rather what is the utility fathers of economic science. of economists for those in society Foley’s presentation of Marx’s who decide where it is worthwhile ideas is nuanced and dispassionate, to put money. At any rate, it is though sympathetic. He explains in a clear that “mechanisms” are im- particularly illuminating way Marx’s portant to understand economic ideas on the fetishism of commodi- processes, but schools of economic ties and discusses with insight major thought strongly disagree on what issues posed by Marx’s rejection of the important mechanisms are. utopian designs for “the socialist For instance, mainstream econom- kitchens of the future.” Foley may ics often emphasizes decreasing be unfair to Marx in saying that from returns to scale and perfect com- the point of view of non-European petition in order to argue that “in traditional societies (Inca statism, Af- equilibrium,” profits are zero. Het- rican tribal communities?), “Marx’s erodox views often point to such form of socialism might be almost mechanisms as economies of scale indistinguishable from capitalism in and increasing returns to scale to its broad outlines” (p. 134). illuminate particular facts of eco- Foley distances himself from some nomic life—for example, that most major aspects of Marxian thought new firms die in their first years of that are especially distasteful to mod- life and that the tendency to the ern academia in general and modern accumulation and centralization economics in particular. He labels as of capital is pervasive. From this “prophecy” Marx’s idea that capital- point of view, perhaps, it would ism is pregnant with a new society. have been good if Adam’s Fallacy He might have said “forecast,” which had dealt at least to some extent denotes exactly the same prediction with mechanisms like these. of the future but is a prestigious term That Foley is seriously interested in economics, without the sugges- in socialism is clear from the al- tion of divine inspiration. (To be fair, most 100 pages his book devotes Foley also uses “prophecy” to refer to to Marx’s economic thought and predictions by Keynes and others.) At socialist ideas and movements. any rate, Foley believes that Marx’s Some reviewers have criticized Foley view of the present society pregnant for this “preposterous extension” with another, in which class relations given to the unruly and subversive and class struggle would disappear, thoughts of Karl Marx. For standard carries “a utopian and unhistorical economists, Marx is just a pile of flavor that sits uneasily with the boring books to be ignored and re- general point of view of historical jected. Economists rarely read Smith materialism” (p. 99). Since Foley does or Ricardo, not to mention Marx, not follow up on this argument to but they “know” that Marx is just explain his general perspective, the

Challenge/March–April 2008 113 Tapia reader is left with the idea that, ac- male power.) It is difficult, therefore, cording to Foley, class relations and to envision any kind of historical class struggle will be a perpetual transcendence of the present eco- characteristic of human society, or nomic organization of our society at least that it would be rather silly that would not involve a very differ- to expect something different. I have ent change from that occurring in heard Duncan Foley assert his social- other historical transformations, in ist inclinations in the past, but it is which one class of oppressors just difficult to say what socialism would displaced another. be if not a society overcoming class A favorite issue for Marxian com- relations and class struggle. Precisely mentators to disagree over is the cel- the persistence of these characteris- ebrated law or tendency of the profit tics in societies like those built in rate to fall, to which Foley refers in authoritarian ways by communist several passages of Adam’s Fallacy. parties in Eastern countries is what The view of the present reviewer is made those nonmarket economies that from passages of the last volume anything but socialist. One of the vir- of Capital it can be inferred that Marx tues of the modern market economy viewed this law mostly as a short-run is that it tends to equalize human tendency leading to economic crises. beings in many respects, except for The crisis itself is a built-in mecha- one rather important area: income nism to raise profitability again. The and wealth. constant tendency of capitalism for This does not mean that differ- the technical composition of capital ences and oppressions based on to increase—that is, that the “vol- gender, ethnicity, or other factors ume” of physical capital (machines, that differentiate human beings are raw materials, etc.) per worker tends no longer important, but these op- always to increase because of com- pressions not based on class appear petition—is one of the historical to be weakening over time. This is trends that Marx clearly outlined. particularly noticeable in the case That tendency also translates into of the social condition and status an increase in the value composition of women, which has improved by of capital; that is, in the long run, leaps and bounds worldwide in the investment in machines, buildings, last century, as revealed by all kind and means of production in general of indicators, from those based on (c) grows faster than capital invested education to those referring to the in paying wages (v), so that c/v, the presence of women in cultural, intel- value composition of capital, also lectual, and artistic life, and in the rises. Since profitability is the ratio spheres of power. (Today’s religious of surplus value s to total capital c + fundamentalism is probably in large v, that is, s/(c + v), which can be also part a reaction to this upswing of written (s/v)/(c/v + 1), the increase women in society, as major religions in the organic composition c/v will have always been stalwart bastions of push profitability toward zero unless

114 Challenge/March–April 2008 Reviews s/v, the rate of surplus value, grows periods of expansion. Only this kind enough to compensate for it. Though of mechanism, producing dampened there are reasons to think that the oscillations of profitability, would growth of the rate of surplus value lead to a long-term falling trend of is bounded while the value composi- the profit rate. Otherwise, the fall of tion of capital is not, the experience profitability immediately preceding of two centuries of historical capital- each slump would be only a mecha- ism seems to suggest that capital has nism to recurrently generate eco- been quite successful in raising the nomic downturns, and there is a lot rate of surplus value, so that profit- of statistical evidence (for instance, ability has come up after each crisis in Wesley Mitchell’s works) that this (be it a mild recession like that of is what actually happens. 2001 or a deep depression like that Whatever the case, and as far as of 1929). the fragmentary nature of Marx’s Adam Smith and David Ricardo Capital allows assertions about what had very clear views on the profit he really thought, it is fair to say that rate’s long-term tendency to fall. the mature Marx who wrote Capital In Adam’s Fallacy, Foley is much viewed economic downturns as cri- more concerned about economists’ ses of profitability. He considered it views on long-term trends than their “a pure tautology to say that crises views on short-run activity, and he are provoked by a lack of effective discusses why Smith and Ricardo demand or effective consumption,”5 thought the profit rate had a secu- a view that is not difficult to find in lar trend to drop (e.g., pp. 24, 79). the Communist Manifesto written two Then he implies that Marx shared decades earlier and where economic Smith and Ricardo’s idea about that crises were explained in an under- falling trend (pp. 136ff.), though he consumptionist manner as crises of disagreed about the mechanisms pro- overproduction. But overproduc- ducing it. It is true that volume 3 of tion is just the flip side of lack of Capital contains statements referring consumption or, in Keynesian terms, to a long-term trend for the rate of lack of effective demand. profit to fall. Some of them are quite Foley’s explanations of the Marx- isolated, and it is believable that, as ian vision of economic crises (e.g., Geert Reuten4 has argued, they may pp. 138ff.) refer little if at all to prof- be no more than interpolations by itability, which seems to be a major Engels, who had to wade through flaw. In my view, Foley’s assertion a pile of unfinished manuscripts to that, in Marx’s view of capitalism, come up with an educated guess at “crises of demand (over-production) what Marx intended. At any rate, would become increasingly frequent, Marx never outlined any mechanism severe, and intractable” (p. 139) is ensuring that the profitability recov- an interpretation of Marxian ideas ery in each crisis brought the profit strongly tinted by Keynesian views. It rate to a lower level than in former is true, however, that almost three de-

Challenge/March–April 2008 115 Tapia cades before Lord Keynes, Rosa Lux- society. Marxist parties, in which emburg had tried to mend socialist those like Eduard Bernstein empha- economic ideas in that direction. In sized reforms to increasingly adapt the Marxist tradition there has been themselves to the capitalist reality, always an important component of had become in the early years of the determinism in which the long-term twentieth century so entangled with trend of the profit rate to fall was seen their national realities that they sup- as the economic mechanism that ported their fighting governments would eventually lead to the demise in World War I. Thus the assimila- of capitalism. Many Marxists viewed tion of Marxist forces into capitalist the Great Depression of the 1930s society, with the abandonment of as the general crisis of the market the goal to overcome capitalism, economy, but then in the 1950s and made them forget about workers’ the 1960s the repeated crises became internationalism and even about a mild business cycle that led many principled opposition to war simply leftists to doubt the inevitability of from humanitarian principles. Only capitalism’s demise.6 a few years after Friedrich Engels In discussing Marx’s political rejoiced in the great triumphs of views (pp. 139–40), Foley probably socialist forces in Europe, millions puts too much emphasis on Marx’s of working-class soldiers were mas- excoriation of those who thought that sacred with the support of such the emancipatory fight must be for “socialist” forces, for the benefit of reforms only. Marx actively partici- industrialists and merchants. The pated in the struggle for reforms. The “Great War,” in which humanist International Workingmen’s Associa- thinkers like Hermann Hesse were “to tion in which Marx invested so much the left” of such “orthodox Marxists” effort for years actively supported the as Karl Kautsky, was the origin of the fight to reduce the working day, and communist parties that, returning to Marx was never reluctant to support Marx’s idea of a principled opposi- legislative regulations improving the tion to capitalism, soon fell into the conditions of work or, in general, orbit of the Soviet Union, becoming the living conditions of the people. mostly pawns in the Soviet struggle This comes up in passages of Capital, for world power. though it can be seen much more The 1960s split of the communist clearly in any narrative of Marx’s international movement between activities in the International, or in those parties “on the right”—going such works as The Poverty of Philoso- into the Russian orbit or the euro- phy or the pamphlet “Wages, Price, communist path to parliamentary and Profit.” softening—and those “on the left”— It is true, however, that Marx supporting Chinese positions—had thought of reforms as minor aspects again a strong component of adapta- of the political, social, and economic tion/rejection to existing capitalism. struggle to create a new cooperative In the end, what the history of these

116 Challenge/March–April 2008 Reviews and other emancipatory movements find it very difficult to imagine a in the twentieth century—the anar- viable economy organized along chists, the greens—has proved is the noncapitalistic lines. Foley may well monstrous capacity of the capital- be conscious that any mention of so- ist system to push those fighting cialism or communism brings up the against it to the irrelevance of radical dismal Eastern European societies or, marginality, or to the impotence of even worse, the killing fields of Kam- spineless reformism. This history puchea, the concentration camps of suggests that Marx’s idea, empha- Stalinist Russia, or the recent swift sized by Rosa Luxemburg, that the executions and mass incarcerations defining element of emancipatory of “Communist” China. To clarify struggle must be the fight against what is and what is not socialism capitalism, and not the fight for re- is a very hard intellectual task, but forms, was quite correct. the difficulty of the task does not Foley makes interesting comments diminish its increasing urgency. For on how socialist politics became these reasons, Foley’s book may leave antidemocratic and manipulative socialist readers rather disappointed, (p. 140ff.), but he seems to shy away although that should not be much of from developing that idea to apply an issue because there probably will it to present-day political forces, be not be many of them. they those labeled communists still For anyone interested in the ability in power in Cuba, China, and a few of human beings to decide their own more Asian countries, or the dozens future, a major issue is the power of of parties defined as social-demo- political parties as instruments to cratic, socialist, or even communist, bring forth an actual transformation grown from the Marxist tree and of society. The idea that political now just practicing “politics” in the parties are antidemocratic institu- worst sense of the word, managing tions connects with the folk idea the interests of the powerful under that “politics” is dirty, commonly capitalist conditions and often not exploited by unscrupulous politi- applying any progressive reform. In cians like those presently (2007) in Spain, for example, during the 1980s office in the United States. However, and early 1990s, the governing So- it also reflects a reality of many de- cialist Workers Party (PSOE) applied cades in which worldwide political economic policies so conservative parties have increasingly become that it is impossible to characterize tools for a party elite to rule, usually them even as Keynesian.7 In Vietnam defending the interest of larger social and China, both purporting to be elites. Both the right (Robert Michels) socialist countries, working time ex- and the left (Karl Korsch, Anton Pan- tending to sixty and even more hours nekoek, Paul Mattick, and Cornelius per week has been reported as quite Castoriadis) have offered interesting common in recent years.8 reflections on this phenomenon.9 Most people in Western society According to Foley, in recent

Challenge/March–April 2008 117 Tapia decades the widening of financial growth of these two countries that markets and the creation of financial arrived late to the splitting up of the instruments “presumably strength- world between the capitalist pow- ens the ability of wealth-holders to ers in the early twentieth century hedge risks and form a more con- was often termed “miraculous.” A sistent view of the future path of similar “miracle” is now occurring the economy” (p. 198). In general, (bourgeois thinkers see miracles though Foley does express some where there are only huge profits), concerns about processes potentially this time in China. dangerous for humanity and con- Adam’s Fallacy provides many nected with capitalism, he neither enjoyments. We find frequent pithy forecasts nor prophesies any major observations on economic facts that crisis in the near future. He seems often go unpublicized—for instance, to play down that in recent years Foley’s comments on “our am- the level of unemployment not only bivalence” toward the commodity in many third-world countries but form, revealed in the fierce debates also in Europe often reached levels about markets for medical care or comparable to those of the Great for selling children or body organs Depression; that big capitalists like (p. 103)—and reflections on why LTCM, Enron, Arthur Andersen, different economic views are or are and many others went down bring- not mutually consistent, or on why ing chills to the increasingly global this or that theory does not seem to economy; that the formerly “vibrant” fit with reality. Near the end of the economy of Japan has gone through book, however, Foley appears to go a protracted stagnation largely con- postmodern with McCloskey. On nected to financial problems; and the one hand, he asserts that capi- that the “Asian tigers” went into talism “shapes people’s lives and economic meltdowns, and financial behavior in predictable ways, and panics occurred in East Asia, Russia, gives rise to measurable regularities and Latin America. in economic data. But it is idle fan- Moreover, when writing on the tasy for economists to elevate these views of economists of past centu- statistical phenomena into universal ries, it may be easy to forget that principles.” Moreover, institutions war is a major component of our of economic life such as markets or economy.10 Do not the huge fiscal the division of labor were created by deficits of the United States in the human beings, “and they can change years since the Iraq occupation them if they want to and understand amount to military Keynesianism? them well enough” (p. 225). On the Can it be disputed that the rapid other hand, there are few reasons to capitalist development of Germany think that major problems are posed and Japan in the early decades of the that capitalism cannot solve. Keynes- past century was a causal precedent ian lessons are now built “into the of both world wars? The economic structures of public finance. They

118 Challenge/March–April 2008 Reviews have worked remarkably well, and bon dioxide. It is quite unlikely that freed us to think about longer-run a problem such as global warming issues” (p. 199). can be solved inside the frame of this Different stories and narratives, economic system. each one giving a specific perspective Even if that problem were solved, on the economy, have been presented which seems very dubious under to the reader, and Foley tells us we present conditions, the permanent can learn from all of them, though push for growth would make other perhaps we must be more serious environmental problems become about not being deceived by the fal- acutely severe over time. Who could lacy of Adam Smith and his follow- have said in the time of Adam Smith ers. But Adam’s fallacy also seems to that water would be the scarce re- be a kind of original sin, infecting source that it is increasingly becom- virtually every important author ing? At the same time, the internal writing on economic issues (p. 4). So, dynamics of capitalism, permanently where are we now? It is difficult to mechanizing production to cut costs, understand how we should take the continue to drive millions out of the last part of this guide to “economic workforce into the world pool of the theology.” Can different schools unemployed or underemployed. This of economic thought be compared accounts now for the millions who, in terms of their ability to explain not every year, but every month, try the economic reality? Is the major to find better lives by migrating from problem with neoclassical econom- Eastern Europe, Latin America, Africa, ics that it presents a view of society or Asia to North America or Western rooted in an immoral fallacy? I rather Europe, or from the Chinese interior think not. to the industrial cities on the coast. Wesley Mitchell often used the All this is what global capitalism terms “money society” and “profit produces when working properly, society” for the economic system in “prosperous times.” But that is that in recent decades has extended only one side of the coin. The flip its sway over the whole planet. That side is the generalized misery of a economic system does not work major depression that, because of without capital accumulation, but unsustainable processes in the world that in turn does not work without economy, may appear at any mo- an ever expanding world market, ment as a world crash. That outcome and a world market is quite unthink- would generalize mass unemploy- able without ever expanding output ment worldwide and put in jeopardy and ever increasing movements of even the ill-spread wealth in the “de- commodities and people. This real- veloped” world. Though Foley’s book ity implies the depletion of natural rather discounts this possibility, the resources at increasing rates, rising reader will find in the book ideas and production of pollution and garbage, discussions that will promote under- and ever increasing emissions of car- standing of these and other economic

Challenge/March–April 2008 119 Tapia

issues. Adam’s Fallacy offers good father, “I felt the impulse,” / said his wife. food for thought, and that has to be Having believed them, / I lost my faith. welcome in an intellectual environ- The vision / left me. “It may well turn,” ment like the Business & Economics I thought, / “but the world will come up section of most bookstores, in which unchanged.” Nevertheless, / their words had clung to my eyes, I saw / the village, junk food is so abundant. dark & crumbling, ever / ephemeral, perched on THE WHEEL, unworthy / of consideration, distasteful even, / & I closed Notes my eyes (Poems [San Francisco: City Lights 1. As in the excellent The Origin of Books, 1977], p. 11). Economic Ideas by Guy Routh (White 7. Sima Lieberman, a mainstream Plains, NY: M.E. Sharpe, 1975). economist, judges the economic policy 2. Foley’s views on environmental of the Spanish socialist party in power issues are presented in a quite technical as indeed more conservative than that of way in his book Unholy Trinity: Labor, Ronald Reagan in her Growth and Crisis Capital, and Land in the New Economy in the Spanish Economy, 1940–1993 (New (London: Routledge, 2003). York: Routledge, 1995). 3. “How to Understand the Econo- 8. Pietro Basso, Modern Times, An- my,” New York Review of Books, November cient Hours—Working Lives in the 21st 16, 2006, pp. 43–46. Century, trans. G. Donis (London: Verso, 4. “ ‘Zirkel vicieux’ or Trend Fall? 1998). The Course of the Profit Rate in Marx’s 9. Robert Michels, Political Parties—A Capital III,” History of Political Economy Sociological Study of the Oligarchical 36 (2004): 1. Tendencies of Modern Democracy, trans. 5. See Capital, trans. David Fernbach E. and C. Paul (New York: Free Press, (New York: Vintage/Random House, 1961); Douglas Kellner, ed., Karl Korsch 1981), vol. 2, chap. 20, sec. 4, pp. 486–87, Revolutionary Theory (Austin: University on simple reproduction. of Texas Press, 1977); Anton Pannekoek, 6. In a poem published in the 1970s, Workers’ Councils (Oakland, CA: AK Stephan Brecht presented this in a beau- Press, 2003); Paul Mattick, Anti-Bolshe- tiful way: Taught I was / these were the vik Communism (London: Merlin Press, last days. Watch the wheel, they said, / 1978); D.A. Curtis, trans. and ed., The see how the world is a village, now dark Castoriadis Reader (Malden, MA: Black- & crumbling, riding / on its upper rim: well, 1997). soon it will turn, the wheel, dragging / 10. This was vividly explained by a man’s world down / down through the major general of the U.S. Marine Corps, dark waters of renewal / to bring it back Smedley D. Butler (1881–1940). See his up again / quite otherwise: / abluted, kin book War Is a Racket (reprint, Los Ange- to light, / pure. “I saw it budge,” / said my les: Feral House, 2003).

To order reprints, call 1-800-352-2210; outside the United States, call 717-632-3535.

120 Challenge/March–April 2008