Marvin Gandall wrote:
>
>
> But I just saw James write (the part you neglected to quote): "The question
> of which technologies are you for or against is absurd. Technology is not
> political, its application is. The question of whether to use a pulley or a
> lever has no political consequences. The social relations between the users
> and the owners of the levers and pulleys do."
For the forseeeable future "technology" _means_ "capitalist technology," and therefore technical questions are _always_ political questions from the git-go.
For example, it is pointless, even seriously misleading, to discuss GM except on the premise that GM decisions are going to be made by companies that are totally indifferent to human needs. So an argument that GM _could_ be a useful technology is a false argument. Will GM as used in current agribusiness be a useful technology? That is the question, and really, the only question. If the answer is no, then for the time being we need to oppose _any_ use of GM technology.
Carrol