> Your argument was that, since the existence of coal and nuclear power
> plants implied the existence of industrial capitalism, the technologies
> were not "neutral"-- mainly over the "capitalism" part. We've repeatedly
> asked about technology that arose (or might have arisen) under other
> economic structures. This, you've refused to answer.
I've refused to answer because you still don't see my point. You are getting stuck on the fact that I mentioned capitalism, when I should have been more specific. I mentioned capitalism as an easy way to avoid detailing all the parts of capitalism that are needed for a nuclear plant to exist.
Do you want me to talk about the printing press? That's pre-capitalist.
OK. The printing press implies access to education and the technology to make metal type. It implies the existence of social relationships that desire to spread their ideas in books and on paper. The printing press implies a system of trade, perhaps the existence of a religion and the existence of miners. This technology implies that there are people who aren't happy with the status quo of people communicating orally or writing stuff down on odd scraps of paper. The printing press enabled lots of good books to be printed, but the primary purpose of the eraly printing press was to publish Christian bibles. Never mind the fact that at the time most of the human population got along OK without having access to moveable type.
Chuck0