But this really controversial? Is it not the case that a large section of the socialist movement rejected the very existence of a market in all but the most transitional of post-capitalist societies. eschewed the market under socialism, so did Trotsky, so does Tony Benn.
Even very recently, Ernest Mandel, the leading Marxist theoretician oi the Fourth International, wrote of the inter-war Lange-Mises debate in the following terms. He asserted that the problem of economic anue sumaiom nas mine wcahwt been take care of by the computer... all participants in that debate seemed to miss Marx's main point, to wit. that resource distribution between different branches of output, and relations between 1 COUUICCO wants, need not be mediated through market mechanisms at all' 2)
John Harrison aceuses me of being evasive and indecisive. protests too much. Is a little wool being puiled over our eyes? Or has evervone entirelv accepted mhe arou. ments in Alec Neve's The Future of reasible socialism since it was Dub. lished? Furthermore, if John uses the index of my book, which he describes as 'useless', he will find a whole sccudl. with several pitite. 'Markets'. subsections is 'attitude of socialists to' referring to no less thar: 20 specific pages lent. Not replicates Nove. (And if I may be a little immodest, the typescript of The Democratic Economy to the publisher in January book was made available to me).