Title: Re: Law suit: [CrashList] Engels' ecological consciousness/ Cunning asunity of anthroandbio
This kind of comment is part of the reason some of us want off this list (another is the intellectual ad nauseum). I find several people on this list to be very rude. It is not responsible to have a list that people cannot get off of when they want to. I have had the same experience as Aftalion.
From: "James Paris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Organization: New Pioneer News Service
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 22:49:46 -0400
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Law suit: [CrashList] Engels' ecological consciousness/ Cunning asunity of anthroandbio
Grow up, Marcelo. It's only an e-mail list. Yes, you should be removed if you so wish, but threatening a lawsuit only makes you look like a total idiot -- and a big f*cking jerk.
James Paris
----- Original Message -----
From: MARCELO AFTALION <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2000 2:05 p.m.
Subject: Law suit: [CrashList] Engels' ecological consciousness/ Cunning asunity of anthroandbio
Thank you.
I have unsubscribed to the Crash-List.
Would you be so kind to bear it in mind.
My problem is that, though I've
sent scores of messages saying so, they pay no attention to my request.
Incredible!
I'm going to file an international law suit for that purpose.
Marcelo Aftalion
sociologist & lawyer
-----Mensaje original-----
De: Charles Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Fecha: Martes, 17 de Octubre de 2000 12:12 p.m.
Asunto: Re: [CrashList] Engels' ecological consciousness/ Cunning asunity of
anthroandbio
>
>
>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/16/00 02:43PM >>>
>At 09:25 16/10/00 -0400, you wrote:
>>Marxist ecological consciousness precedes the modern ecological movement.
>>See the following excerpt from "The Part Played By Labour in the
>>Transition from Ape to Man" by Frederick Engels. Since human production
>>is always part of the context of Engels' thought, this passage also
>>demonstrates that our discussions of use-value and exchange-value are
>>relevant to ecology, contra complaints from some on this list.
>>
>>Charles Brown
>>
>>((((((((((
>
>
>It's a fine passage.
>
>According the footnotes in my copy, the crash he refers to was in Germany
>in May 1873 and lasted well into the late 70's. This may be of interest to
>Mark re the title of this list.
>
>((((((((((
>
>CharlesB: Interesting , Chris.
>
>Another thought that has been bouncing around in my head on the issue of
value and ecology is that Marx's _Capital_ is descriptive of the state of
things under capitalism. It should be obvious to everyone that Marx was not
proposing by writing _Capital_ that the production of exchange-value or
value and surplus-value should continue as the modus operandi of human
society. Though Marx's description of capitalism, unlike those of bourgeois
political economists or vulgar economists, gives the most favorable
interpretation of the role of the working class in the process, Marx's whole
life project was to overthrow the order he describes in _Capital_. In
general, he advocates a revolution in the mode of production such that
production would be guided by use-value and the qualitative needs and wants
of people, and not guided by the accumulation of capital and the production
of surplus-value and exchange-value.
>
>Thus, somewhat self-critically, we Marxists in discussing value in terms of
use-value and exchange-value should note that we do not see the dynamics of
exchange-value as continuing after world socialist revolution succeeds and
predominates. So, the concept of exchange-value is not included in the
Marxist analysis of ecological revolution.
>
>Of course, use-value is still oriented to a humanist or anthropocentric
conception , so that issue remains in dispute.
>
>Furthermore, the Marxist conception somewhat correlated to the conception
of ecologists who have biocentric orientation is CUNNING as discussed by
Marx in the following:
>
>
>An instrument of labour is a thing, or a complex of things, which the
labourer interposes between himself and the subject of his labour, and which
serves as the conductor of his activity. He makes use of the mechanical,
physical, and chemical properties of some substances in order to make other
substances subservient to his aims. [2]
>
>footnote: [2] "Reason is just as cunning as she is powerful. Her cunning
consists principally in her mediating activity, which, by causing objects to
act and re-act on each other in accordance with their own nature, in this
way, without any direct interference in the process, carries out reason's
intentions." (Hegel: "Enzyklop�die, Erster Theil, Die Logik," Berlin, 1840,
p. 382.)
>
>(from
>Capital Volume One
>Part III:
>The Production of Absolute Surplus-Value
>CHAPTER SEVEN:
>THE LABOUR-PROCESS AND THE PROCESS OF PRODUCING SURPLUS-VALUE )
>
>((((((((
>
>CB: Ironically, this occurs in a discussion of instruments or tools. Yet,
cunning is passive instrumentality . Thus, it implies a certain unity of
biocentrality and anthropocentraly. The passage from Hegel reminds of Hegel
and Engels other famous aphorism regarding freedom as the mastery of
necessity. Cunning "masters" necessity , and necessity is nature, by
yielding intelligently to nature.
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
>To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
>http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
>
