>Carl,
>
>By selective editing that I choose to attribute to
>carelessness, you left out my last line about how Marx
>expected that non-profit driven innovation and
>economic development would take a very different form
>than the capitalist kind. I expect that you will
>correct that misleading statement of my position and
>reading of Marx, which makes me (and Marx) look like a
>Heartfieldian cheerleader for current forms of
>innovation at any cost. ...
>
>Andie
My apologies to Andie and the shade of K. Marx for miscasting them as "Heartfieldian cheerleaders," a term I will readily grant presents a most uncongenial public image.
Carl
>--- Carl Remick <carlremick at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >From: andie nachgeborenen
> > <andie_nachgeborenen at yahoo.com>
> > >
> > >... Incidentally Marx would be contemptuous about
> > the
> > >views expressed sometimes on this list that human
> > >progress or survival or socialism/communism require
> > a
> > >halt to economic development or innovation. ...
> > Woody Guthrie's
> > >paean to the glories of the Grand Coulee Dam are
> > much
> > >more true to the spirit of Marx than grim ascetic
> > >warnings about the end of innovation.
> >
> > The problem is, what one era defines as "economic
> > development" may be seen
> > by a subsequent era as economic destruction -- an
> > activity whose long-term
> > social, environmental and other costs far outweigh
> > the shorter-term
> > benefits. Bound by personal or contemporary
> > scientific ignorance of
> > humankind's ability to wreak havoc on global
> > ecosystems, indiscriminate
> > leftist technophiles like Marx and Woody Guthrie are
> > no more to be trusted
> > as accurate analysts of "negative externalities"
> > than the most greed-blinded
> > capitalist. To say that ongoing technological
> > innovation is essential is
> > truistic; the question as always is, what *kind* of
> > innovation? Clearly,
> > for instance, it is folly to continue to make heavy
> > continuing investment in
> > internal-combustion-vehicles that contribute to
> > global warming and other
> > pollution. There is an overriding global social
> > need for alternative power
> > sources to be the principal focus of R&D. Simply to
> > give blank-check
> > endorsement to any and all forms of "innovation" as
> > an undeniable social
> > boon is senseless.
> >
> > Carl
_________________________________________________________________ http://liveearth.msn.com