[lbo-talk] You Can't Make Me Talk

Tayssir John Gabbour tayssir.john at googlemail.com
Sun Apr 8 07:37:31 PDT 2007


On 4/8/07, Ted Winslow <egwinslow at rogers.com> wrote:
> None of these deal with the problem of organizing instrumental
> activity in an ideal community as conceived by Marx.
>
> He understands the "economic" problem in ancient terms as the problem
> of meeting the "needs" of a "good" life. The content of a good life
> is non-economic; it is ethical - creating and appropriating beauty
> and truth within relations of mutual recognition. It is the problem
> of "friends" (in a sense derived from Plato and Aristotle) who, as
> friends, "should have all things in common."

Yeah, Von Mises explicitly punts on that:

"The knowledge of the fact that rational economic activity is

impossible in a socialist commonwealth cannot, of course, be used

as an argument either for or against socialism. Whoever is

prepared himself to enter upon socialism on ethical grounds on the

supposition that the provision of goods of a lower order for human

beings under a system of common ownership of the means of

production is diminished, or whoever is guided by ascetic ideals

in his desire for socialism, will not allow himself to be

influenced in his endeavors by what we have said."

<http://www.mises.org/econcalc/CONCLUSN.asp>

Incidentally, Michael Albert has an interesting counterpoint:

"In a Participatory Economy we want to be Efficient.

"Does the word induce a bit of nausea in some of you? It does in

me. But we need to get over that, because efficiency really means

seeking to attain our aims and in doing so not wasting things we

value. We should all therefore favor efficiency. The alternative

to favoring efficiency is to favor either not attaining our aims,

or to favor wasting things that we value.

"So why does the word induce some nausea? In capitalism owners

preference become the sought after ends, and what owners value is

not wasted. So in capitalism efficiency means seeking maximum

profits while reproducing the conditions of profit-making without

wasting assets that owners can exploit. Capitalists don't mind

destroying humans with black lung disease, or exterminating humans

with weapons or with hunger, when the people afflicted are

expendable as far as profit is concerned. Capitalists don't mind

sickening people in the wake of their workplaces' pollution. They

don't mind blowing up or destroying assets that they themselves

can't exploit, though others will suffer from the loss. Under

capitalism being efficient means being vile, because it is a vile

system – and this is why we have some antipathy to the word

efficiency as it is used all around us."

<http://www.zmag.org/Parecon/writings/albert_lac.htm>

Tayssir



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list