As an outsider who subscribes to crit-geog-forum for the intellectual
connections rather than the interminable IBG-RGS saga, I must say
that the most impressive statement made in debate thus far is that
posted by Ron Johnston. Can it really be true that the RGS
connection is going to reduce the intellectual content of
Transactions and Area, and cost members MORE rather than less? Or is
this just old fashioned materialist analysis?
It seems to me that members of the IBG 'bought' an idea of
partnership with less than ideal partners in a tough and difficult
world, but that - as with so many other development partnerships -
the pudding proves inedible.
Alan Mabin
Programme for Planning Research/
Department of Town and Regional Planning
Witwatersrand University
Johannesburg, Gauteng, South Africa
phone +27 11 716 2688
fax +27 11 403 2519
also use [log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|