|
> I have no desire to debate the necessity of
industrialization. That's
not the issue. Class, property, the social organization of labor are the issues. < Comment
History cannot be undone, precisely because it is history and
has a real shape and being. The social organization of labor may still seems
abstract, but it is not. The combatants must press their imaginative narrative
on events that describe a society of associated producers, freed from the
commodity form, at least in all socially necessary means of life.
Men and women never relinquish created history, no matter how
horrible one describes it.
The future sits in front of us to be created and that is the
challenge.
Me . . . I am not going back to subsistence economy or
ideological concepts of Lakota Indian communism or some other "ancient
ideological form" presented in a modern form that longs for a past that never
existed. The longing is for something more imaginative, creative and in harmony
with what exists and the possible.
Politics is the art of the possible. When ones imagination
outruns the possible there is a problem and all kinds of class divergence takes
place.
A modern communism rooted in this state of development of the
financial architecture and this stage of development of the technical and social
organization of labor, will make sense to the American peoples, and most of the
world people.
Some things will never make sense to some people. Here,
political will decides.
See what's free at AOL.com. |
- Re: British farming and market imperatives, (continued)
- Re: British farming and market imperatives, Louis Proyect Fri 22 Jun 2007, 01:00 GMT
- Re: British farming and market imperatives, sartesian Fri 22 Jun 2007, 01:29 GMT
- Sicko So Meano To Hillary, Leigh Meyers Thu 21 Jun 2007, 18:10 GMT
- Re: Sicko So Meano To Hillary, Dan Scanlan Thu 21 Jun 2007, 18:41 GMT
- Re: Industrial society and its discontents, Waistline2 Thu 21 Jun 2007, 18:04 GMT
- query, Jim Devine Thu 21 Jun 2007, 18:01 GMT