Ian: > >>Innovations in themselves are neither good nor bad (it all depends on >outcomes). _Compulsion_ to innovate under the whip of M-C-M' should >have become by now obsolete, having already performed its >world-historical task. > >Will there be this capitalist-like _compulsion_ to innovate in >Justin's socialist market? > >Yoshie >****** > >Exsqueeze me but the 2nd sentence is a bunch of hasenpfeffer. The dialectic >between technology and ecology is an open ended process [potentially, of >course]. The "dialectic between technology and ecology" sounds a little too much like the Frankfurt School, of which I have not been too fond. Yoshie
- Re: Re: entrepreneurs Jim Devine
- Re: Re: Re: M-C-M' and surplus value under capitali... Justin Schwartz
- Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: M-C-M' and surplus value under ... Justin Schwartz
- Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: M-C-M' and surplus val... Michael Perelman
- Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: M-C-M' and surplus valu... Justin Schwartz
- Re: Re: M-C-M' and surplus value under capital... Louis Proyect
- Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: M-C-M' and sur... Michael Perelman
- Re: M-C-M' and surplus value under capitalism and s... J. Barkley Rosser, Jr.
- Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: M-C-M' and surp... Justin Schwartz
- Re: M-C-M' and surplus value under capitalism and s... Lisa & Ian Murray
- Re: Re: M-C-M' and surplus value under capital... Yoshie Furuhashi
- Re: Re: M-C-M' and surplus value under capitalism a... Justin Schwartz
