>>> A quick response to one point in Jerry Levy's email. Jerry attempts to
drive a wedge between members of the editorial
board of COPE who do not advocate the TSSI system and the call for papers
issued by the editors. I am such a member
of the editorial board. So far as I am concerned, the suggestion that the
editors are in anyway acting contrary to the
editorial board's wishes is false. Moreover, I think that editorial board
members are capable of making up their own minds
as to the desirability of actions of the editors. Jerry's criticisms
essentially hinge on whether it is possible for a journal to
provide a forum for the exploration of a particular approach and still to
be pluralist. This is, I think, is something which only
experience can tell. But I am very hopeful, and happy to publicly endorse
the call for papers which the editors have issued. <<<
Hope springs eternal for Andy Denis.
Does he expect pigs to fly as well?
Does the past practice of the Editors matter at all in terms
of whether the journal will be genuinely "steadfastly committed
to pluralism"?
Does what is actually written in the "Mission Statement" of
the journal matter at all?
Jerry
PS: I imagine you don't want to discuss on this list the contents of the
paper written by Freeman and Kliman for the 2005 Annual Conference
of the Association of Heterodox Economics, do you? There's much
_about_ the journal _Capital & Class_ in that paper. There's even
some information about the authors and the C&C's sister journal, the
_Review of Political Economics_ in that article. Since Andy has
read that paper, he should realize that his hope is misplaced and
naive.
|