Talk:Maurice Dobb
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
Please rate the article and, if you wish, leave comments here regarding your assessment or the strengths and weaknesses of the article. |
||
This article needs work. There is nothing on his contributions to Marxist theory as such. His work on evonomic history is ignored too, including his role in the debate with Paul Sweezy over the transition from feudalism to capitalism.JimFarm 15:41, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
hey Jim. You are quite right. I did the bulk of the article but I mainly did it when I was immersed in arguments against the right about economic calculation. It is far from comprehensive. I would entreat anyone qualified to add or modify material as they see fit. He was a very interesting figure. cheers BernardL 23:43, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
In that case Bernard, you might wish to add a section to the article on the Socialist Calculation Debate to detail Dobb's arguments on that controversy. JimFarm 12:29, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
He is most famous as the recruiter of Kim Philby and that should be top of the article. David J James
To my knowledge it's still a matter of controversy as to whether Dobb knowlingly recruited Philby to become a Soviet spy. Dobb was Philby's tutor at Cambridge and he had a strong impact on the development of Philby's political thinking. We also know that Philby sought out Dobb's advice concerning how he could best help the Communist movement and that Dobb referred Philby to a Communist-front organization which in turn referred Philby to the Comintern from which Philby would be recruited as a Soviet spy. As to whether Dobb knew that this would the outcome, that still remains a controversial issue. Dobb's family has strongly denied this, while others have maintained that Dobb functioned as a kind of talent scout for the Soviets. I would agree that the Maurice Dobb article ought to mention this issue and controversy. JimFarm 16:12, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
If you are going to repeat the accusation that Dobb recruited Philby then I suggest you give the evidence of this claim, for without such a citation it is mere slander and something which should not be included in any respectable biographical piece. I have read all the "claims" which assert this even the accusation, now proven false, that he was a Soviet agent - which is absurd if anyone knows anything of this life and his role within the party. And please, you must do better than cite journalistic pieces such as those produced by Knightley to justify what amounts to the character assassination of a man who can no longer speak for himself. Much evidence, which could settle this issue, remains to be published, and until it is repeating accusations that have dubious foundation only denigrates wikipedia. ----A.P.A 13 Dec 2006
'He is most famous as the recruiter of Kim Philby ' That's on the Kim Philby wiki page. Whether true or not that's the most famous thing about him. If you want to argue about it go there. David J James
[edit] Still needs a lot of work
In my humble opinion Maurice Dobb does not get the treatment he deserves. The focus of this article is on some of the points he made in his Political Economy and Capitalism: Some essays in economic tradition (1937), but this source is nowhere indicated (and I seriously wonder if the 1937 Dobb would have subscribed to most of the interpretations). As I saw above some people want to fight the socialist calculation debate all over again, but I think this is hardly the place. Absent are: 1. His important contributions to the history of economic thought, including his work with Sraffa on the Ricardo complete edition, and on economic history. 2. His writings on the Soviet Union. 3. His contributions to "Sraffian" economics. I will try to provide the material for these, beginning with his history of thought contributions. This still leaves the general weakness of the existing text. I suggest that the original authors look at it critically, move general issues on socialist planning and the socialist calculation debate to separate topics, and take out everyting that cannot be directly attributed to Dobb. And of course I agree with all those who do not wish to see unfounded spy stories here. By the way, I have found the redirect page Dobb pointed to Lou Dobbs. That was a bit (?) odd, so it now redirects to the real Dobb. All the best, Robertsch55 08:32, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
