Re: Does Hubbert Peak Bode Ill for World System?

LP:

>>On the question of ecological disaster. I have
noticed a tendency in certain kinds of dogmatic
Marxism to assert that capitalism will 
always find substitutes for whatever. In a sense this
is true. It also undermines the sort of "second
contradiction" millenarianism of O'Connor. It doesn't
matter if the planet goes to shit. As long as 
the stock markets function and as long as there are
getaways like St. Barts, I doubt that the big
bourgeoisie will care very much.<<

Well, this does take a bit of unpacking (like most of
what Louis writes). Louis's definition of 'dogmatic
Marxmism' seems to be any brand of it that doesn't
coincide with what a handful of ex-SWPers daily post
on Marxmail list. In other words, if you dare to
disagree with Louis and his pals from the 70s, you
will be called 'ultraleftist plotter' or worse
'dogmatic'. 

Next LP writes:
>>It seems to me that the challenge facing socialism
(is that a dirty word here?) is to present a clear
alternative to capitalism. To be taken seriously by
scientists, you have to address the question of
ecological sustainability. On the Marxism list, a
couple of subscribers mentioned that the planet can
sustain about 2 billion people. If you mention that in
some quarters, you get called "Malthusian".<<

Well what you might get asked instead is, Then how in
the heck did the planet get to triple that population,
with most of that population living outside the the
most develoved forms of consumerist, industrial
society? BTW, I actually found Malthus a better read
than some of the stuff I saw on Marxmal list. 

LP again:

>>It is not Malthusian to understand that we are
rapidly approaching the point where industrial society
as it is presently constituted cannot continue,
whether under private or public ownership of the means
of production.<<

But having discussions about it does not really make
capital somehow capable of responding to any situation
besides its own artificial shortages. Look at the
current high price of oil. Does it reflect some sort
of megaconsciousness on the part of capital concerning
a looming peak of production? No, they are concerned
with how to have a sustained high price of oil,
trending somewhat upward (or somewhat downward,
depending on how they've hedged) while growing
profits. Look at the industry's profits before the war
against Iraq, and after the war against Iraq, and you
will see they are doing very well. 

>>We have to reintegrate the town and the country, as
the Communist Manifesto called for. Energy, water and
soil have to be carefully husbanded. Wildlife must be
protected. There can be a better future,but 
Julian Simon type bromides from either the capitalist
intelligentsia like Gregg Easterbrook or "Marxists"
have to be rejected.<<

One might think this a bromide of some sort, but you
need a more easy to swallow form than the 'Julian
Simon type bromides from either capitalist
intelligentsia like Gregg Easterbrook or "Marxists"
have to be rejected"' pill. Really, might we not ask
just a bit more consideration for 'readability' on a
list that goes out people of various backgrounds and
interests?

Charles Jannuzi
University of Fukui, Japan  



=====
http://www.literacyacrosscultures.org
 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/literacyacrosscultures

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/