As the saying goes, Yes & No.
Technology in hunting/gathering 'stage'
was sufficient to secure continuation and even growth of the species.
Technology now seems more apt to destroy than to continue the species.
. . . .for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in
thereat: 14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life. . .
Socialist revolution on a world-wide scale can
be seen as the narrow gate here through which we must pass if technology is not to destroy us.
Carrol
^^^^^ CB: I agree with you, comrade. See my paper " Indigenous Knowledge in Aboriginal Land Recovery" http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/marxism/2006w37/msg00036.htm
where I said:
In 1982 , states which had only existed for 6 or 7,000 years, civilization were moving in an arms race and confrontation toward nuclear holocaust , and potential species self-extinction , more than any other recorded or known time in human history.
If we were to extinguish ourselves in the current nuclear weapon and other
weapons of mass destruction
( who knows what kinds of weapons all the new bourgeois physics might come up with) obviously, this capitalist mode would have failed the Darwinian test for survival. All previous material modes, no matter how impoverished in there modes of _production_ in comparison with the capitalist mode, would make our species more fit than the capitalist mode because of their correspondingly low modes of destruction, especially mode of species self-destruction. Capitalism's anti-species being quotient is dangerously high for our Darwinian fitness.
On this evidence, which type of society is more fit in the Darwinian sense ?