[PEN-L:28586] RE: Re: RE: Re: industrialized farming

["Devine, James" <jdevine@xxxxxxx>]

Title: RE: [PEN-L:28581] Re: RE: Re: industrialized farming

me: >BTW, it's not factories or machine _per se_ that represented the shame of
>the 19th century "industrial model," but how they were used, who made the
>decisions, and the motivations of these people (aggressive
>profit-seeking). Similarly, I don't think that pesticides and chemical
>fertilizers _per se_ are the problem. The "Green Revolution" [GR] technologies
>would have worked out better if social relations in the countryside had
>been different.

LP:>No, the "Green Revolution" would have not worked out better under
socialism. I assume that this was you meant by "if social relations in the
countryside had been different."  While it might lead to a short-term
increase in crop yield, it ultimately is unsustainable:<

I wasn't referring to the whole package of GR technologies, with the large-scale irrigation, etc. Under different social relations -- socialism, but also under traditional modes of production -- some or most GR techniques would be rejected, while others would be used. It's not the technology that's crucial, but the social relations, i.e., who makes the decisions, their motives, etc.

Technical change gives power to the people who control the technology. Unfortunately, technology can be used for both good and evil. The point is not to reject technology _per se_ but to try to make sure that it's used for good.

Heck, I'm beginning to sound like "Star Wars." (Use the force for good, not evil, Luke.... Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.)

Jim Devine jdevine@xxxxxxx &  http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine