>>> jkschw at hotmail.com 04/09/01 04:06PM >>>
I think I actually agree with every word Charles writes here; it must be some kind of a first. A small side point: Yes, Sahlins considers himself a Marxist. But he doesn't advocate that we become hunter gatherers. Learn from them, yes. As Charles suggests. To advocate taht we become H-Gs, that would be profoundly anti-Marxist, also nuts. --jks
(((((((((
CB: Great ! Reminds of when we demonstrated together in Ann Arbor against the U.S. invasion of Grenada.
By the way, here's a case where I can point to a prof. I had: Sahlins was my advisor for my senior year as an anthro major.
Yes, learn from earlier modes and techniques, not actually everybody going back and being fulfledged hunters and gatherers.
>
> >>> jkschw at hotmail.com 04/08/01 09:55PM >>>
>
>However, it is true that
> >>capitalism has made possible a great increase in standards of living
> >>for many millions. No one who has been bitten by the "Manifesto"
> >>Marx will deny that. That still does not mean we have overcome
> >>scarcity. Or ever will. --jks
> >
> >What do you think of Marshall Sahlins' argument?
> >
> >***** The Original Affluent Society
> >
>
>Sahlins argues athat hunter-gatherers worked a few hours a day and spent
>the rest of the time telling stories and hanging out, not a bad life (as
>long as there wasn't a famine or drought). The Sahlins argument is a
>favorite among the Live Simply crowd, who think that we can eliminate
>scarcity by reducing our wants. Theoretically, this is true. It is of
>course
>_profoundly_ anti-Marxist, for those of you who care about such things;
>
>(((((((((
>
>CB: I'm not sure that this argument is profoundly anti-Marxist, for at the
>time Sahlins still considered himself a Marxist , I believe. His criticism
>of Marx comes in _Culture and Practical Reason_.
>
>At any rate, the fact that life in preclass society, hunters and gathering,
>foraging or gardening modes of production is not nasty, brutish and short,
>and involves much "leisure" time does not contradict Marx's thesis ,which
>is applicable to agricultural and other class modes, not preclass modes.
>
>If you notice, Engels added a footnote on this issue to the first sentence
>of the Communist Manifesto main text, confining its content to written
>history as follows:
>
>"The history of all hitherto existing society [2] is the history of class
>struggles."
>
>
>
>"[2] That is, all _written_ history. . . . .
>
>
>On the direct issue of this tread , it does not seem likely that Marx would
>anticipate that communism would just constantly "grow" in the exact same
>way that capitalism does. The decisions of capitalist society in expanding
>needs and wants cannot be identical to the decisions that will be made by
>communist society. . . . .
>
>
>((((((((((((
>
>
>Marx
>praised capitalism for its creation of nrew wants and needs.
>
>((((((((
>
>CB: Yes, but this is a onesided or partial version of Marx's attitude on
>this. It is not accurate to attribute to Marx the idea that every want or
>need that capitalism develops is praiseworthy. Marx denounced the anarchy
>of capitalist production, the lack of planning. In this regard , he
>criticizes the bourgeois selection of new wants and needs.
>
>It is clear that the communist revolution would institute a revolutionary
>change in generation of needs and wants from what and how these are
>generated in a capitalist regime.
>
>((((((((
>
>
>
>He thought that
>communism would be better than capitalsim at satisfyting these things. Me,
>I
>don't know. But I do know that the genie is out of the bottle. Short of a
>cataclysmic disaster, we will never be hunter-gathereras, and anyone who
>davocates reducing (as opposed to, say, rearranging) our needs and wants,
>will find a cold audience from contemprary workers an oppressed people.
>
>(((((((((
>
>CB: I could see a society in which part of growing up would involve living
>in areas that preserved the various and successive modes of production in
>human history ( not just hunting and gathering) learning to live in each,
>sort of a profound summer camp element in everyone's elementary curriculum.
> Then the optimum level of energy expenditure for the main form of society
>could be shaped with people who could live comforably and happily without
>all the per capita energy expenditure of today. There would be a selective
>integration of modern high technique with ancient technique, and lifestyle.
> The exact balance would be decided by people in communist society, and
>not under the pressure of competiton of capitalism which drives constant
>"growth". The significance of Sahlins book is that it is feasible to
>develop a modified version of foraging or gardening or agricultural
>lifestyle , that is safe and comfortable, carriers the health benefits of
>an outdoor life; and this could be!
> integrated with elements of modern hi tech lifestyle providing
>flexibility in energy expenditure if there is a problem with depletion of
>fossil fuels or global warming from capitalism's fierce energy expenditure
>pace.
>
>There is nothing in Marx that conflicts with a modulated growth regime
>more rationally tied to actually existing resources and conscious of
>profound pollutions and depletions uncovered by natural science since
>Marx's lifetime.
_________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com