Progress. It's wonderful.
Carrol
Russell Grinker wrote:
> Mr P.A. Van Heusden wrote
>
> >The idea of productivity of being the final principle of history is one
> >which belongs more with Locke than with Marx. After all, which is more
> >progressive? The 'backwards' productive methods of Mexican peasants, or
> >the 'modern' productivity of an industrialised farm? If it is the
> >industrialised farm, then I ask again which is more progressive - the
> >peasants of the Chiapas 'autonomous municipality', or the farmers of the
> >US corn belt?
> >
> >There are many ways to skin a capitalist....
>
> Wasn't it Trotsky who said (when comparing the Soviet Union of the '30s to
> western countries I think) that progress boiled down to economy of time? I
> think this is just another way of talking about productivity of labour.
> After all, if progress is not about reducing the amount of time we have to
> spend reproducing ourselves and increasing the amount of time available to
> work on our human side, then what is it?
>
> On the undoubtedly worthy, but 'backwards' production methods of Mexican
> peasants, it's worth repeating another quote from the man. He also said, I
> believe, that "asceticism has
> nothing in common with Marxism".
>
> Russell