Re: [Marxism] Knowledge Society and Capitalism

[mds <zenporcupinegrind@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

A very interesting thread; it led me to look into (the rather narrower
field of) software patenting again; recent discussions of "free
software being a revolutionary act" a couple of weeks ago are almost a
fore-runner.

Three interesting pieces for review (by myself too, they've just been
printed for re-reading):

- http://swpat.ffii.org/log/intro/index.en.html ("Software Patents in
Europe: A Short Overview ");
- http://lpf.ai.mit.edu/Patents/danger-of-software-patents.txt ("The
Danger of Software Patents, a Speech by Richard Stallman")
- http://lpf.ai.mit.edu/Patents/against-software-patents.html ("Against
Software Patents, The League for Programming Freedom").

The issue of software patenting is of course an interesting one, the
notion of commodification of ideas and concept. The implications of
proprietary in the virtual have both metaphoric and actual
ramifications on the political etc.

I'm sure the issue of Pathfinder/SWP policy / use-value /
exchange-value re: their publications and copyright/litigation threats
will crop up again. We'll wait and see.

regards,
Marc

On Tuesday, September 28, 2004, at 02:06  am, andypollack@xxxxxxxx
wrote:

> Good points! (Definitely have to re-read them).
> While I'm on the topic, Mandel's piece on socialist planning in NLR is
> obviously a classic; and if folks want I can send links to Stafford
> Beers and his work setting up a computer network for the economy under
> Allende (yes, that far back!)
>
> -- "Jurriaan Bendien" <andromeda246@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I enjoyed reading Cockshott & Cottrell also, but I think their book is
> not
> without problems. For example, they confuse international trade in a
> socialist economy (applying the comparative costs principle) with
> foreign
> trade in a capitalist economy (based on absolute competitive advantage
> and
> maximising real returns), adhering instead to a Ricardian theory of
> foreign
> trade, which has been totally disproven logically and empirically.
>
> Unsurprisingly, Paul Cockshott's theory about imperialism is a bit
> "eclectic" to say the least. He argues there was imperialism, then it
> went
> out of existence, and now it exists again. It's a bit like a rabbit
> which
> disappears into its warren and then pops out again.  He argues that
> profit
> cannot arise from unequal exchange (
> http://reality.gn.apc.org/polemic/imper.htm ) and he argues that
> "unequal
> exchange" would mean that "US workers exploit Mexican labour". Unequal
> exchange is a medieval theory according to Cockshott, not in the sense
> of
> mercantile capitalism but a Thomist doctrine of just price, because, he
> argues, the "terms of trade" are determined only by the productivity of
> labour, and nothing else.
>
> Cockshott & Cottrell make very good points about participatory
> democracy,
> but they don't develop much of a theory about decision-making which is
> of
> organisational significance. So in some important respects I think
> their
> book has more poetic value than real theoretical substance. Which is
> not to
> say that these authors aren't very capable of very good and substantive
> research, because they are. At least they really understood what the
> question is, as the title of their book states: "Towards a New
> Socialism".
> In that sense, they're ahead of much of the British Left.
>
> Jurriaan
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Marxism mailing list
> Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Get your name as your email address.
> Includes spam protection, 1GB storage, no ads and more
> Only $1.99/ month - visit http://www.mysite.com/name today!
>
> _______________________________________________
> Marxism mailing list
> Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism

__________________________________________________
M. D. Simpson
zenporcupinegrind <at> breathe <dot> com

"Whoever worships the accomplished fact is incapable of preparing the
future."


_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism