>>Restraining the  growth of consumption does not
mean going back to living in caves and cooking  over
buffalo-chip fires. For decades in the rich nations
increased  consumption has not been correlated with
increased satisfaction, and  perpetuating Third World
poverty is a luxury that the prosperous can no  longer
afford. Greatly enhanced efficiency, reduced
consumption among  today's superconsumers,
more-sensible choices of energy technologies, and  a
halt to population growth followed by a gradual
decline might, as John  Holdren and others have
clearly shown, lead to a closing of the rich-poor  gap
without an ecological collapse. Over the next century,
with careful  planning, mutual trust, and cooperation,
humanity could create a sustainable  global society
with a higher quality of life for  everyone.<<

Comment

The above is taken from one of Comrade  Jones articles and summarize a 
political and economic conception. 

Most  folks within what is called Marxism, generally agree that consumption 
is a  social act embracing production, reproduction, distribution, exchange and 
the  property relations within. Others will add to this the significance of  
alienation, mystification and the fetish that attaches itself to commodity  
production and examine appearance forms and shapes. Others will go further in  
describing mans impact on nature as condition, precondition and result  
(interactivity and objectification) or affirmation of man essential powers and  
sense 
perception, which are formed (not created), shaped and altered by the  object 
that is man and the object outside of man manifesting the essential  power. 

Consciousness - that is lived experience, unfolds on the basis of  the 
experience giving shape to a particular form of consciousness. Believing is  
also 
seeing. 

Generally, one ends up with the circle from which there is  no escape. The 
circle is real because it arises as the affirmation of mans  essential powers; 
but it is escapable, because it is a historical form and shape  of 
consciousness/praxis. If over consumption is defined as the problem, the  
solution is to 
stop over consuming and defining consumption as reproduction.  

Man is not a machine, but a metabolic process. This cannot be proven to  he 
who understands man as a machine. Marxism as such cannot solve the problem  
because it - the problem of over consumption, is also biological in its 
essence,  
but not in its appearance form as reproduction. Industrial society is its own 
 shape and the word "machine" really means industrial machines and industrial 
 ideology and industrial concepts. Industrial society by definition does not  
mimic nature's metabolic non can it. 

We have not hit the walls of the  laws of thermo dynamics in my opinion. The 
earth is a perpetual energy  conversion metabolism.  Man disrupts this 
spontaneous process in his  species activity as productive man. That is to say 
the 
earth is part of a system  of energy conversion. The wall that has been hit is 
energy conversion on the  basis of industrial artifices and shapes, with the 
property relations within.  

"Restraining the growth of consumption does not mean going back to  living in 
caves and cooking over buffalo-chip fires" begs the question what is  being 
cooked, why is it being cooked and what is the genesis of this cooking  rather 
than the energy infrastructure of cooking and its shape. 

What is  the origin of need? 

>>Over the next century, with careful  planning, mutual trust, and 
cooperation,
humanity could create a sustainable  global society with a higher quality of 
life for everyone.<< 

If  the above is true and I believe it to be, this means advancing to a 
radically  different approach and understanding of authentic human needs. Marx 
provides the  way forward. Authentic human needs begin with and has its genesis 
in 
man's  metabolic process.  Obesity is an extreme appearance form of bourgeois 
 social relations or bourgeois property or society shaped on the basis of a  
system of reproduction driven by circuits of private capital. 

DMS was  more correct than Comrade Jones in terms of the .

Waistline.  


_______________________________________________
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis

Reply via email to