>Yoshie writes:
>
>You might clarify your political program, then. If not
>deindustrialization & labor-intensive production under socialism,
>what do you think would allow human beings to live with the
>constraints that you have us posit? Do you agree with Sweezy &
>Foster that an energy revolution will be possible under socialism?
>Or you don't have a political program consistent with your theory?
>
>=====
>
>One reason why listers might be afraid to jump into any discussion is this
>sort of challenge. Given the vastness of the task facing socialists, such
>"false holism" is not worthy of a casual email; rather, it would be the
>subject of a whole discussion group. Maybe PEN-L could evolve that way. But
>you could sound a bit more constructive, rather than an implicit offer to
>"put up or shut up". Given the obvious time and effort Mark has spent
>contributing of late, that's unjustified.
>
>Michael K.
Your criticism might be justified if Mark stopped dismissing others'
political programs on the grounds that such are utopian based upon
the constraints that he has us posit (the constraints that others
have yet to accept, mind you). Naturally, one is curious as to what
then is not utopian in the terms of his theory. Spelling out what
isn't utopian doesn't amount to a blueprint. It merely should
indicate the limits of the possible.
Yoshie
