>I don't think that one can separate the political economy from the
>technology, even for a moment.
That's only a half truth. Gene technology can be used in many ways. But no matter who's doing it, you're still going to need some basic lab equipment.
> But I'm all in favor of new[*]
>technologies _in the abstract_. The question concerns the specific
>costs vs. their benefits of specific new technologies, where we can't
>forget external costs or benefits. (The devil is in the details.)
Yes, of course. I know that, and I've said it over & over.
> And
>the nature of these costs and benefits depend on the nature of the
>political economy. The latter also has a big effect on which
>technologies are developed and introduced.
>
>[*] one word that should be dropped is "modern." It's either
>propaganda (everything new is good) or an object of derision. It's
>often mixed up with capitalist modernity (or Soviet-style modernity).
>"New" is much simpler and doesn't imply "good" or "bad."
So all those "New!" labels stamped on freshly introduced consumer products are just value-neutral?
Doug