Originally posted by
[email protected] 1 2006, 10:25 AM
Leftism, which you view Primitivism/Radical Ecoism to be a subset of, is an ideology that seeks to liberate workers from sufferring and exploitation. There is no greater way to reduce the sufferring of workers than the introduction of Machinery into production processes, whereby labour is displaced. Under the Capitalist system of production relations, the introduction of Machinery does not fulfill its liberationary potential, but rather spells further insecurity to workers as they join the reserve army of labour. Under a Socialist series of production relations, Members of Collectivized Enterprises would of course recieve the profits produced by mechanized enterprise through the principles of Socially owned means of production. (to other real leftists: Note that I am a Market Socialist, so you may have a different version, but no doubt we are alike in pricniple)
Now, as part of the Primitivist beliefs, you would no doubt choose to 'downgrade' production processes and indeed the avaliability of certain commodities. Without the aid of Capital as a factor of production, the production of commodities would move to a system of labour intensive production. Where before a steam engine/robot etc produced a commodity, now a worker would be required to expend yet greater toil to satisfy human wants. How exactly would this liberate workers?
There are 3 economic systems that any economic system must answer, in view of the fundamental economic problem of unlimited wants and scarce resources: What to produce, how to produce it, and for whom to produce it. Socialist recognize that the final question in this conundrum has been answered in an inherently unfair way under Capitalism. Primitivists seem only concerned with the 2nd question - they fail to realize that the exploitation of Capitalism lies in the discrepency between the ownership of the means of production (and hence, product) and the input of labour.
You say that speaking out against Technology is heresy. So, we are listening, lets have some answers. How would present levels of commodity production be maintained (especially necessary goods for survival, such as food) and how is promoting labour intensive production liberating? Out of interest, under what relations of production would Primitivism operate?
Also, on a more random note, take a look at this. Would you agree?
Animal Farm
.....But the luxuries of which Snowball had once taught the animals to dream, the stalls with electric light and hot and cold water, and the three-day week, were no longer talked about. Napoleon had denounced such ideas as contrary to the spirit of Animalism. The truest happiness, he said, lay in working hard and living frugally.....
Leftism, which you view Primitivism/Radical Ecoism to be a subset of, is an ideology that seeks to liberate workers from sufferring and exploitation. There is no greater way to reduce the sufferring of workers than the introduction of Machinery into production processes, whereby labour is displaced. Under the Capitalist system of production relations, the introduction of Machinery does not fulfill its liberationary potential, but rather spells further insecurity to workers as they join the reserve army of labour. Under a Socialist series of production relations, Members of Collectivized Enterprises would of course recieve the profits produced by mechanized enterprise through the principles of Socially owned means of production. (to other real leftists: Note that I am a Market Socialist, so you may have a different version, but no doubt we are alike in pricniple)
Now, as part of the Primitivist beliefs, you would no doubt choose to 'downgrade' production processes and indeed the avaliability of certain commodities. Without the aid of Capital as a factor of production, the production of commodities would move to a system of labour intensive production. Where before a steam engine/robot etc produced a commodity, now a worker would be required to expend yet greater toil to satisfy human wants. How exactly would this liberate workers?
There are 3 economic systems that any economic system must answer, in view of the fundamental economic problem of unlimited wants and scarce resources: What to produce, how to produce it, and for whom to produce it. Socialist recognize that the final question in this conundrum has been answered in an inherently unfair way under Capitalism. Primitivists seem only concerned with the 2nd question - they fail to realize that the exploitation of Capitalism lies in the discrepency between the ownership of the means of production (and hence, product) and the input of labour.
You say that speaking out against Technology is heresy. So, we are listening, lets have some answers. How would present levels of commodity production be maintained (especially necessary goods for survival, such as food) and how is promoting labour intensive production liberating? Out of interest, under what relations of production would Primitivism operate?
Also, on a more random note, take a look at this. Would you agree?
Animal Farm
.....But the luxuries of which Snowball had once taught the animals to dream, the stalls with electric light and hot and cold water, and the three-day week, were no longer talked about. Napoleon had denounced such ideas as contrary to the spirit of Animalism. The truest happiness, he said, lay in working hard and living frugally.....
Nice book.
Orwell is a favorite author of mine amongst many other prominent ones.
Do I agree with those sentiments?
Yes I do in a sense ,but unlike Snowball I would imput more thinking into that.
:)
Leftism, which you view Primitivism/Radical Ecoism to be a subset of, is an ideology that seeks to liberate workers from sufferring and exploitation. There is no greater way to reduce the sufferring of workers than the introduction of Machinery into production processes, whereby labour is displaced. Under the Capitalist system of production relations, the introduction of Machinery does not fulfill its liberationary potential, but rather spells further insecurity to workers as they join the reserve army of labour. Under a Socialist series of production relations, Members of Collectivized Enterprises would of course recieve the profits produced by mechanized enterprise through the principles of Socially owned means of production. (to other real leftists: Note that I am a Market Socialist, so you may have a different version, but no doubt we are alike in pricniple)
I see to obliterate economicism completely of all kinds.
I believe you eat what you grow or catch.
Or if you live in a area where there is a farming community you get to feast with the rest of the community as long as you put a equal amount of work in helping the agriculture.
As for house and property if you build a house or create materials they are solely your possesion.
Or if you barter for materials or even barter materials for a place of residence than that too is completely acceptable.
If you barter materials for trade of another material than one can keep those possesions too.
Economicism to me is the system of slaves represented by elitists who take the full advantage completely.
Now, as part of the Primitivist beliefs, you would no doubt choose to 'downgrade' production processes and indeed the avaliability of certain commodities. Without the aid of Capital as a factor of production, the production of commodities would move to a system of labour intensive production. Where before a steam engine/robot etc produced a commodity, now a worker would be required to expend yet greater toil to satisfy human wants. How exactly would this liberate workers?
The liberation would be that every person within the tribe is equal in the most eglatarian system echoed by the complete natural order around them.
Of course people are going to have to work and toil for survival ,but such is the case for every species.
Primitivism is very simple you work to eat and to substain your tent,hut or living dwelling.
There are 3 economic systems that any economic system must answer, in view of the fundamental economic problem of unlimited wants and scarce resources: What to produce, how to produce it, and for whom to produce it. Socialist recognize that the final question in this conundrum has been answered in an inherently unfair way under Capitalism. Primitivists seem only concerned with the 2nd question - they fail to realize that the exploitation of Capitalism lies in the discrepency between the ownership of the means of production (and hence, product) and the input of labour.
I don't seek a economic system as one you may think of.
You say that speaking out against Technology is heresy. So, we are listening, lets have some answers. How would present levels of commodity production be maintained (especially necessary goods for survival, such as food) and how is promoting labour intensive production liberating? Out of interest, under what relations of production would Primitivism operate?
Some Primitivists speak of a hunting and gathering system only.
I differ though because I think a farming system like agrarianism with hunting and gathering right beside it living in peace with the natural eco-system around the small village center is a good system that can be reasonable with Anarch Primitivism.
Production to me would be farming,hunting and gathering,lumberjacking,and maybe a form of artisans.