Talk:Michael Albert

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Big up Albert[edit]

History may well count this guy as the greatest economic visionary that ever lived.

Wikipedia is not the place for hagiography. Also, let's keep the speculation down, shall we? BTW, does this bit of fawning adoration of Albert belong here at all?

Replace long-standing copyvio with link to the material

I removed section "He has a Ph.D. in economics from the University of Massachusetts and an undergraduate degree in physics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology." for there are no sources to back it up, while there are sources that confirm that he was expelled from MIT. [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Larryfuku (talkcontribs) 19:43, 7 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Limit comments please[edit]

To all of y'all: could we limit comments on these talk pages to discussion about how to improve the article? This isn't really a forum for discussing opinions of Parecon or Michael Albert. DanKeshet 22:24, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)

Weatherman member?[edit]

The Michael Albert listed as a Weatherman or Weather Underground member links to this article. Same person? Or do we need some disambiguation? Dwalls 01:27, 12 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

According to the interview by Democracy Now's Amy Goodman with Michael Albert
( ) he indicates:
"Weathermen was a group that was engaged in activity at the time. It was a part of SDS, not a part I was belonged to, but they wanted to recruit me" He added that he (M. Albert) was not initially sure how to respond, whether to decline this invitation or not, and that Noam Chomsky dissuaded him: "At a particular moment, I went into Noam’s office, and I asked him about it, this recruitment effort by them and whether—you know, how I should relate. Noam was loath to give people advice about what to do in their life or about strategy..The Weathermen were a very—they were the most militant, most violent wing of SDS. Their analysis was a bit peculiar. I don’t think we need to go into details.
"But in any case, so I asked [Chomsky] about that, and he was very loath to do that, but in this particular case—we were already pretty close, and he—you know, he didn’t want me to make an error, so he did make a suggestion. And he sort of said very quickly, [that] 'their motives are good. Some of them are going to die. Some of them are going to hurt others. They’re going to have very little effect on the well-being of people around the world because of what they’re doing' And in a phrase, right, he captured what was there, and his advice was important. I don’t think it was definitive in my choice not to join, but it certainly would have been a big factor." Notice the phrase "my choice not to join" (emphasis added) near the end. --Harel (talk) 21:12, 6 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is this person a libertarian?[edit]

This article is described as "Part of a series on Libertarian socialism", and among the categories in which it has been placed are "American Libertarians" and "Libertarian Socialists". Is there any evidence to support the contention that this person is a libertarian?Tillander 07:45, 25 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Article makes many assertions, has been here for years, and has not a single reliable source. Book titles are given, but no publisher, not ISBN, no book reviews.E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:02, 2 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Some sources were included that were okay for verification but not notability, see WP:PRIMARY. Publishers and ISBN are easy to find. Here are a couple of reviews:
Jonpatterns (talk) 10:35, 3 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External link[edit] MAlbert does not work. --Alex1011 (talk) 08:50, 8 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Its working at the moment. Jonpatterns (talk) 09:38, 10 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Media lens[edit]

Media lens is a 'two man' blog, it also represents the opinion of two notable authors. So maybe their stance on 'participatory economics' should be reinstated? Removed by @Philip Cross:, see diff. Jonpatterns (talk) 09:36, 10 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is a "two-man blog" and thus not admissible here for use as a citation. See Wikipedia:Identifying reliable source for a policy explanation. While Wikipedia has an article about Media Lens and its two editors, sources recommending their work have always been scarce, even on the political fringe. Michael Albert, in his Z-net role, has also had issues with their work in the past. Philip Cross (talk) 09:49, 10 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]