[PEN-L:28613] RE: Re: Re: Re: Vandana Shiva

["Forstater, Mathew" <forstaterm@xxxxxxxx>]

Doug wrote:

>I thought the problem was capitalist farming, not "industrial" farming.

I think this is something that needs to be thought through carefully.
There is a long debate between those who take the position that
technology itself is for the most part "neutral" with the problem being
only what is done with it, and those whose position is that technologies
often reflect the social relations (and ideology) under which they were
developed and thus cannot be so simply re-applied under alternative
social relations without any repercussions.  If I recall correctly,
Murray Bookchin, in "Towards a Liberatory Technology" (in POST-SCARCITY
ANARCHISM) takes the former position, while David Dickson in ALTERNATIVE
TECHNOLOGY AND THE POLITICS OF TECHNICAL CHANGE takes the latter
position.  I think we could all think of examples of some machines that
were designed to exploit workers to the fullest and result in bodily
harm to operators--so that their use in a non-capitalist economy would
not be sufficient, whereas we can also think of many examples of
technologies that would seem to be potentially usable under alternative
social relations, but anyone who thinks that the former are the
exception and basically a relic of the 19th c. and the latter are the
rule and characterize more recent technologies, Dickson's book should be
read and his arguments and examples considered.  If I had it handy I
would give some examples--thy are very compelling.  Mat