{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0170863309352518, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.920212765957447, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A Reply to Professor Schweickart

There has, in the past two decades, been an enormous world-wide upsurge of serious interest in, and rigorous investigation of, the central theses of the political economy of Karl Marx. Such doctrines as the labour theory of value, which for almost a century were ridiculed as outmoded ideology, as superstition, as metaphysics, are now taken seriously and debated with the aid of the most sophisticated tools of modern formal analysis. What began primarily as an activity of mathematical economists has now become a philosophical endeavour as well, with the result that the rediscovery of Marx is taking on a broader and deeper dimension. Professor Schweickart has contributed significantly to this literature in his splendid new book, Capitalism or Worker Control!, and I want it made very clear today that my friendly dispute with him over certain details of my recent paper in no way represents the sort of factionalism on the left that has too often in the past weakened the forces of social progress. Before turning to the technical part of Schweickart's paper, let me make