Re: [Marxism] Worse Than Fossil Fuel

["rrubinelli" <rrubinelli@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

It's one thing to oppose the waste and destruction of capitalism, it's
quite another thing to tar (nice choice, right?) all prospects for
development with the brush of destruction, and call for dramatic,
drastic reductions in energy production and consumption.

So I would suggest before Marxists endorse draconian measures, we
measure the real impact of , not conservation, but regression in the
production of energy; the social cost of making energy use, regardless
of the social conditions of its production, consumption, management---
regardless of its use, the target, instead of its production as a
commodity, a value.

I know one thing it means-- it means greater reliance on biomass as a
fuel-- exactly what Mr. Monbiot decries.

rr
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joonas Laine" <jjonas@xxxxxx>
To: <marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, December 10, 2005 5:21 AM
Subject: [Marxism] Worse Than Fossil Fuel


a good article on why a drastic reduction in energy consumption is of
utmost importance, no matter how the energy is generated (reneweables or
whatever)



________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism