[lbo-talk] Parecon Discussion...

[Marta Russell]

>
>>  wouldn't making art that is deemed socially desirable labor
>>  so one is compensated making art for oneself as much as
>>  anything else?
>
>Painting can be socially valuable -- perhaps it is if you do it -- or
>ridiculous garbage, as it would be if I did it. I could not get a job in
>a good economy -- even in a bad one or a remotely sane one, painting,
>unless it was painting the outside of houses...which I in fact used to
>do.

Hi Michael,

"Socially valuable" being defined as work is going to butt heads 
against the disabled people's movement. The concept instantly 
devalues the impaired body which may be incapable of producing in the 
sense you speak of.

While many disabled workers are denied the opportunity to work either 
due to discrimination of not getting an accommodation on the job, it 
still remains that there are those who will not be "productive" in 
the sense of making products.  Now, these people are marginalized, 
cast off as useless under capitalism.

The right to be different may include a right not to produce anything 
and still remain a valuable part of society.

How does Parecon deal with this matter?

Marta Russell