Link to an article by Thorstein Veblen:
“Bolshevism Is a Menace—To Whom?” from The Dial, Vol. 66, p. 174 (Feb. 22, 1919)
Cultural Detritus, Reviews, and Commentary
Link to an article by Thorstein Veblen:
“Bolshevism Is a Menace—To Whom?” from The Dial, Vol. 66, p. 174 (Feb. 22, 1919)
Link to an article by Peter LaVenia:
“The State and Permanent Revolution”
Bonus links: The State and Revolution and Results and Prospects and “Lenin’s ‘State and Revolution'”
Link to an interview with Larry Krasner, conducted by Nyle Fort:
“Meet Larry Krasner, Philly’s New Progressive DA Who Has Sued the City’s Police Dept. 75 Times”
Bonus links: “The Problem with Sullivan & Cromwell Partner Nicolas Bourtin and His Five Myths About White Collar Crime” and The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison
Link to a series of articles from teleSUR about the October Revolution:
Link to an article by Kevin Murphy:
Link to a report by The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists:
“Paradise Papers: Secrets of the Global Elite”
Bonus links: “Joe Ricketts Is a Walking Case for a $1 Million Maximum Income” (“A maximum income—and progressive taxation more generally—is less about redistributing income than about redistributing power, though the two aims go hand-in-hand.”; this article does make numerous contradictory statements, though, first stating by way of a quote the principles of Modern Monetary Theory, then immediately contradicting them with reference to “starving public coffers of funds”; an important distinction here is between state and local jurisdictions that cannot issue currency, and a sovereign federal government that can) and “How the Rich Stay Rich” (this interview makes a misleading reference to a book that actually also admits that revolutions can cause equalization of wealth, but the interviewee seems to follow a similar defeatist line of thinking rebutted in War and Revolution: Rethinking the 20th Century, for example)
Link to an article by Erwin Chemerinsky:
What Chemerinsky does here is apply principles of “legal realism” to critique the “textualism” school of thought as merely concealing the expression of class interests.
Bonus link: Language and Symbolic Power
I have read a number of interviews and essays by C.J. Polychroniou. Why do people keep publishing his drivel? His ideas are naive, conclusory, and counter-factual. He is one of those quaint anarchist-leaning fools whose ideas Lenin conclusively debunked over a century ago. Why doesn’t Polychroniou just shut up, or crawl back under whatever bridge he lives under?