Message 04190 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxenT04118 Message: 12/27 L11 [In index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

Re: [ox-en] Re: [ox-en] Re: [ox-en] Re: [ox-en] Re: [ox-en] Re: [ox-en] built-ininfinitegrowth (was: Re:Meaning ofmarkets, scarcity, abundance)

Dmytri Kleiner wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 10:39:15 +0100, Gregers Petersen <gp.ioa> wrote:

Apart from Mauss - what have you read?

What a bizarre question.

I asked you to help me understand your arguments. You seem interested
primarily in establishing qualifications.

No. You keep refering to 'Mauss etc." and I simply would like to know
what this "etc." covers over? I might seem otherwise to you, but you
need to present more specific reference points - If you don't help me I
cannot help you.

I don't think I've stated that competition was something completely new
- I just made the attempt at stating that the importance of the
"competitive" element took over during the direct colonial contact.
Further, "competition" does not need to be tied to "expansion".

Well, if the competition is based on always giving more than received it
does, no?

Why do you keep making the assumption that competition is only about
'giving more than you have recieved'?

I just made the statement that 'kula' is not money, 

Your implications where that kula not being money cast doubt upon my
that money originates in tribute and prestige exchange and not in exchange
of surplus
among direct-producers.

If you believe my beliefs are false, I challenge you to change them and
them with correct ones, you can not do that by casting doubts, allusions to
unreferrences matieral
and appeals to authority.

I'm not stating that your belief is false (though, I might have doubts
about your argument), but simply stated that you cannot build the
argument on the statement that 'kula' is money. On the opther hand, you
seem uninterested in asking the obvious question (which you edited out
in the qoutes from my prior reply).

Nicholas Thomas: Entangled objects. 1991, Harvard University Press.

When I ask for a reference, I expect you to explain and apply what you have
learned from this book
so that your knowledge can help the rest of us.

You have to do some of the work yourselves - and this could include
looking through 'google', wikipedia or going to your local library.

Gregers Petersen
Anthropologist, Ph.d fellow
Department of Organization
Copenhagen Business School
Kilen, Kilevej 14A, 4.
DK - 2000 Frederiksberg
(+45) 3815 2811
Skype: gregers.ioa
Jabber: glp
IRC: Look for 'glp'

Free Software & Ownership

Contact: projekt

Thread: oxenT04118 Message: 12/27 L11 [In index]
Message 04190 [Homepage] [Navigation]