[Fis] CfP: Marx is Back - The Importance of Marxist Theory and Research for Critical Communication Studies Today

2011-07-21 Thread Christian Fuchs
Marx is Back: The Importance of Marxist Theory and Research for Critical 
Communication Studies Today


Call for Papers for a Special Issue of tripleC – Journal for a Global 
Sustainable Information Society.

Edited by Christian Fuchs and Vincent Mosco



http://fuchs.uti.at/wp-content/uploads/CfP_Marx_tripleC.pdf
For inquiries, please contact the two editors.

In light of the global capitalist crisis, there is renewed interest in 
Karl Marx’s works and in concepts like class, exploitation and surplus 
value. Slavoj Žižek argues that the antagonisms of contemporary 
capitalism in the context of the ecological crisis, the massive 
expansion of intellectual property, biogenetics, new forms of apartheid 
and growing world poverty show that we still need the Marxian notion of 
class. He concludes that there is an urgent need to renew Marxism and to 
defend its lost causes in order to render problematic capitalism as the 
only alternative (Žižek 2008, 6) and the new forms of a soft capitalism 
that promise, and in its rhetoric makes use of, ideals like 
participation, self-organization, and co-operation, without realizing 
them. Žižek (2010, chapter 3) argues that the global capitalistcrisis 
clearly demonstrates the need to return to the critique of political 
economy. Göran Therborn suggests that the “new constellations of power 
and new possibilities of resistance” in the 21st century require 
retaining the “Marxian idea that human emancipation from exploitation, 
oppression, discrimination and the inevitable linkage between privilege 
and misery can only come from struggle by the exploited and 
disadvantaged themselves” (Therborn 2008, 61). Eric Hobsbawm (2011, 12f) 
insists that for understanding the global dimension of contemporary 
capitalism, its contradictions and crises, and the persistence of 
socio-economic inequality, we “must ask Marx’s questions” (13). 



This special issue will publish articles that address the importance of 
Karl Marx’s works for Critical Media and Communication Studies, what it 
means to ask Marx’s questions in 21st century informational capitalism, 
how Marxian theory can be used for critically analyzing and transforming 
media and communication today, and what the implications of the revival 
of the interest in Marx are for the field of Media and Communication 
Studies. 


Questions that can be explored in contributions include, but are not 
limited to:



* What is Marxist Media and Communication Studies? Why is it needed 
today? What are the main assumptions, legacies, tasks, methods and 
categories of Marxist Media and Communication Studies and how do they 
relate to Karl Marx’s theory? What are the different types of Marxist 
Media/Communication Studies, how do they differ, what are their 
commonalities?

* What is the role of Karl Marx’s theory in different fields, subfields 
and approaches of Media and Communication Studies? How have the role, 
status, and importance of Marx’s theory for Media and Communication 
Studies evolved historically, especially since the 1960s?
* In addition to his work as a theorist and activist, Marx was a 
practicing journalist throughout his career. What can we learn from his 
journalism about the practice of journalism today, about journalism 
theory, journalism education and alternative media?
* What have been the 
structural conditions, limits and problems for conducting 
Marxian-inspired Media and Communication Research and for carrying out 
university teaching in the era of neoliberalism? What are actual or 
potential effects of the new capitalist crisis on these conditions?

* 
What is the relevance of Marxian thinking in an age of capitalist crisis 
for analyzing the role of media and communication in society?

* How can the Marxian notions of class, class struggle, surplus value, 
exploitation, commodity/commodification, alienation, globalization, 
labour, capitalism, militarism and war, ideology/ideology critique, 
fetishism, and communism best be used for analyzing, transforming and 
criticizing the role of media, knowledge production and communication in 
contemporary capitalism?

* How are media, communication, and information addressed in Marx’s work?
* What are commonalities and differences between contemporary approaches 
in the interpretation of Marx’s analyses of media, communication, 
knowledge, knowledge labour and technology?

* What is the role of dialectical philosophy and dialectical analysis as 
epistemological and methodological tools for Marxian-inspired Media and 
Communication Studies?

* What were central assumptions of Marx about media, communication, 
information, knowledge production, culture and how can these insights be 
used today for the critical analysis of capitalism?
* What is the relevance of Marx’s work for an understanding of social 
media?

* Which of Marx’s works can best be used today to theorize media and 
communication? Why and how?

* Terry Eagleton (2011) demonstrates that the 10 most 

Re: [Fis] meaningful information

2011-07-21 Thread Robin Faichney
The meaning of meaning, indeed! I agree that the behaviourist
position is unsatisfying, but the effects of perception on a
perceiving system begs the question: what is a perceiving system?

For me, a perceiving system is one with which we might empathize.
That, for me, is the crucial difference between a mechanistic view of
meaning as resultant behaviour, and seeing it rather as an internal
effect upon the system concerned. To view a system as having such
internals, that is, having an intrinsic point of view, is to view it
as being an appropriate object of empathy. And empathy, unlike
meaning, can be directly explained in third person terms, as second
order modeling.

Robin
(This is my second post of the week, so I can't say any more in the
very short term, but my MSc dissertation, available on my website, is
quite relevant, and I'm giving a very short but entirely relevant
presentation at the DTMD2011 workshop at Milton Keynes in September.)

Wednesday, July 20, 2011, 8:13:23 PM, Guy wrote:

 This is an interesting question.  What is the meaning of meaning?  I would
 define as something like the affects of perception on a perceiving system.
 Once a system has been affected it might change its behavior, but I would
 hesitate to equate a behavioral response directly to the meaning of a
 perceived signal.  While your definition has the advantage of external
 observation, I think behavior is too far removed from internal
 meaningfulness.  I wouldn't be comfortable, for example, saying that
 Skinner's bell meant salivation to his dog subjects.

 Regards,

 Guy


 On 7/20/11 11:47 AM, Steven Ericsson-Zenith ste...@semeiosis.org wrote:

 
 There is a lot of concept overloading in the community involving the term
 meaning. So it would help me if you and Antony could just give a one
 sentence definition of the term. For example, for me:
 
 meaning = the behavior that is the product of apprehending a sign.
 
 Which is an extreme pragmatic definition in the spirit of Peirce. Note that
 this definition excludes, or rather characterizes differently, descriptive
 sentences of the form The dog runs toward the house. The meaning of which 
 is
 not that the dog runs toward the house, but the behavior of the apprehender.
 
 With respect,
 Steven
 
 
 On Jul 20, 2011, at 10:41 AM, Loet Leydesdorff wrote:
 
 Dear colleagues,
 
 Some of you may be interested in this context in my forthcoming article ³
 Meaning as a sociological concept: A review of the modeling, mapping, and
 simulation of the communication of knowledge and meaning, Social Science
 Information 50(3-4) (2011) 1-23. In preprint available at
 http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1011/1011.3244.pdf .
 
 I argue that the dynamics of meaning are very different from those of
 information.
 
 Best wishes,
 Loet
 
 
 Loet Leydesdorff
 Professor, University of Amsterdam
 Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR),
 Kloveniersburgwal 48, 1012 CX Amsterdam.
 Tel.: +31-20- 525 6598; fax: +31-842239111
 l...@leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/
 
 From: fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] On
 Behalf Of Pedro C. Marijuan
 Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 1:38 PM
 To: fis@listas.unizar.es
 Subject: Re: [Fis] meaningful inforamtion
 
 Thanks, Anthony, for the info on your book. As you will see during future
 discussion sessions (currently we are in the vacation pause) some parties in
 this list maintain positions not far away from your own views. In our 
 archive
 you can check accumulated mails about the matter you propose --e.g.
 discussions during the last spring. But I think you are right that the whole
 biological scope of information has been rarely discussed.  best wishes
 ---Pedro
 
 FIS website and discussions archives: see http://infoscience-fis.unizar.es/
 
 
 aread...@verizon.net escribió:
 I emailed an earlier version of the following contribution to the listserve 
 a
 few days ago and am interested in finding out if it is suitable  for
 dissemination and, if os, when it might be included. My main interest is in
 promoting discussion about the approach it takes to dealing with the
 observer-dependent aspects of information.
 
 My book  Meaningful Information: The BridgeBetween Biology, Brain and
 Behavior' has just been published by Springer. Itintroduces a radically new
 way of thinking about information and the importantrole it plays in living
 systems. Thiså opens up new avenues for exploring howcells and organisms
 change and adapt, since the ability to detect and respondto meaningful
 information is the key that enables them to receive their geneticheritage,
 regulate their internal milieu, and respond to changes in their
 environment.The types of meaningful information that different species and
 different celltypes are able to detect are finely matched to the ecosystems
 in which theylive, for natural selection has shaped what they need to know 
 to
 functioneffectively within them. Biological detection and 

Re: [Fis] CfP: Marx is Back - The Importance of Marxist Theory and Research for Critical Communication Studies Today

2011-07-21 Thread Dr. Shu-Kun Lin
Some very quick comments: This is extremely interesting topic. I have
this idea also since 2008 when I was reading and considering a lot about
sustainability. Capitalism and free market economy, if not regulated or
revised by adding some elements of socialism (Maxism or communism) and
planned economy, will for sure deplete all the nonrenewable resources. I
understand now why many people (including the father and the brothers of
my grandmother from a rich landlord in China) from rich families or
capitalist families sacrificed their lives for the revolutionary cause
of communism. North Korea people live in a much more sustainable way
than other countries. (Democracy and dictatorship are another issue of
discussion.) It is a pity that the great Soviet Union was destroyed and
China has been actually doing the capitalism not long after the death of
Mao.

Open Access on the Internet is also actually a socialism
movement, in my opinion.

On 21.07.2011 11:46, Christian Fuchs wrote:
 Marx is Back: The Importance of Marxist Theory and Research for
 Critical Communication Studies Today 
 Call for Papers for a Special
  Issue of tripleC – Journal for a Global Sustainable Information
 Society.
 Edited by Christian Fuchs and Vincent Mosco



 http://fuchs.uti.at/wp-content/uploads/CfP_Marx_tripleC.pdf For
 inquiries, please contact the two editors.

 In light of the global capitalist crisis, there is renewed interest
 in Karl Marx’s works and in concepts like class, exploitation and
 surplus value. Slavoj Žižek argues that the antagonisms of
 contemporary capitalism in the context of the ecological crisis, the
  massive expansion of intellectual property, biogenetics, new forms
 of apartheid and growing world poverty show that we still need the
 Marxian notion of class. He concludes that there is an urgent need to
 renew Marxism and to defend its lost causes in order to render
 problematic capitalism as the only alternative (Žižek 2008, 6) and
 the new forms of a soft capitalism that promise, and in its rhetoric
  makes use of, ideals like participation, self-organization, and
 co-operation, without realizing them. Žižek (2010, chapter 3) argues
  that the global capitalistcrisis clearly demonstrates the need to
 return to the critique of political economy. Göran Therborn suggests
  that the “new constellations of power and new possibilities of
 resistance” in the 21st century require retaining the “Marxian idea
 that human emancipation from exploitation, oppression, discrimination
 and the inevitable linkage between privilege and misery can only come
 from struggle by the exploited and disadvantaged themselves”
 (Therborn 2008, 61). Eric Hobsbawm (2011, 12f) insists that for
 understanding the global dimension of contemporary capitalism, its
 contradictions and crises, and the persistence of socio-economic
 inequality, we “must ask Marx’s questions” (13). 



 This special issue will publish articles that address the importance
  of Karl Marx’s works for Critical Media and Communication Studies,
 what it means to ask Marx’s questions in 21st century informational
 capitalism, how Marxian theory can be used for critically analyzing
 and transforming media and communication today, and what the
 implications of the revival of the interest in Marx are for the field
 of Media and Communication Studies. 


 Questions that can be explored in contributions include, but are not
 limited to:



 * What is Marxist Media and Communication Studies? Why is it needed
 today? What are the main assumptions, legacies, tasks, methods and
 categories of Marxist Media and Communication Studies and how do
 they relate to Karl Marx’s theory? What are the different types of
 Marxist Media/Communication Studies, how do they differ, what are
 their commonalities?
 * What is the role of Karl Marx’s theory in
 different fields, subfields and approaches of Media and Communication
 Studies? How have the role, status, and importance of Marx’s theory
 for Media and Communication Studies evolved historically, especially
 since the 1960s? * In addition to his work as a theorist and
 activist, Marx was a practicing journalist throughout his career.
 What can we learn from his journalism about the practice of
 journalism today, about journalism theory, journalism education and
 alternative media?
* What have been the structural conditions, limits
 and problems for conducting Marxian-inspired Media and Communication
 Research and for carrying out university teaching in the era of
 neoliberalism? What are actual or potential effects of the new
 capitalist crisis on these conditions?

* What is the relevance of
 Marxian thinking in an age of capitalist crisis for analyzing the
 role of media and communication in society?
 * How can the Marxian
 notions of class, class struggle, surplus value, exploitation,
 commodity/commodification, alienation, globalization, labour,
 capitalism, militarism and war, ideology/ideology critique,
 fetishism, and communism 

Re: [Fis] CfP: Marx is Back - The Importance of Marxist Theory and Research for Critical Communication Studies Today

2011-07-21 Thread Matutinovic, Igor (GfK Croatia)
It is easy to forget some important facts about the presumed sustainability of 
planned/communist, historical and current economies. The Soviet block had an 
immensly polluting industry which paid almost no attention to the environemntal 
nor human health. Citizen protests, unlike the NGO acitivity inthe West, were 
banned. The most ecologically  destructive economic project recorded so far 
inthe world  - the draining of the Aral Sea was done in the USSR - an entirely 
planned disaster!

Under Mao, Chinese population was subject to periodic starvation and their 
economy, despite planning efforts was moving in no direction at all. It is 
after gradually implementing capitalist institutions since Deng Xiaoping 
reforms that China become second world economic power and lifted at least a 
couple of hundred of millions from poverty. In the meantime China is destroying 
its environment - the consequnce of joint impact of wild capitalism and 
communist planning (Three Gorges Dam project was initiated under Mao but had 
economic means for realization only under the capitalist institutions). North 
Corea is starving periodically its population and depend on foreign aid. 

These former and current communist economies can not be role models for 
sustainability in any sense. About the quality of life and human rights in 
former USSR there is a plenty of evidence from those who lived there, and very 
few of them feel pity for its collapse.

Capitalism and free market economy, if not regulated will for sure deplete all 
the nonrenewable resources. 
However, besides planning, which has been very present in the post WWII 
capitalist economies I do not believe that we can learn much from the former 
communist systems. 

The solution may lie in the change of the predominat Western wordview, which is 
overconfident in technological fixes and dominated by materialist and economic 
values. Our societies lack substantial environental values and we miss the 
non-material aspects of the quality of life. This is a legacy of modernity, and 
a communist ideology pertains to this legacy, and therefore has been equally 
unfriendly to environemnt. 

Igor Matutuinovic


-Original Message-
From: fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] On 
Behalf Of Dr. Shu-Kun Lin
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 4:40 PM
To: christian.fu...@uti.at; Christian Fuchs
Cc: fis@listas.unizar.es
Subject: Re: [Fis] CfP: Marx is Back - The Importance of Marxist Theory and 
Research for Critical Communication Studies Today

Some very quick comments: This is extremely interesting topic. I have this idea 
also since 2008 when I was reading and considering a lot about sustainability. 
Capitalism and free market economy, if not regulated or revised by adding some 
elements of socialism (Maxism or communism) and planned economy, will for sure 
deplete all the nonrenewable resources. I understand now why many people 
(including the father and the brothers of my grandmother from a rich landlord 
in China) from rich families or capitalist families sacrificed their lives for 
the revolutionary cause of communism. North Korea people live in a much more 
sustainable way than other countries. (Democracy and dictatorship are another 
issue of
discussion.) It is a pity that the great Soviet Union was destroyed and China 
has been actually doing the capitalism not long after the death of Mao.

Open Access on the Internet is also actually a socialism movement, in my 
opinion.

On 21.07.2011 11:46, Christian Fuchs wrote:
 Marx is Back: The Importance of Marxist Theory and Research for 
 Critical Communication Studies Today
 Call for Papers for a Special
  Issue of tripleC – Journal for a Global Sustainable Information 
 Society.
 Edited by Christian Fuchs and Vincent Mosco



 http://fuchs.uti.at/wp-content/uploads/CfP_Marx_tripleC.pdf For 
 inquiries, please contact the two editors.

 In light of the global capitalist crisis, there is renewed interest in 
 Karl Marx’s works and in concepts like class, exploitation and surplus 
 value. Slavoj Žižek argues that the antagonisms of contemporary 
 capitalism in the context of the ecological crisis, the  massive 
 expansion of intellectual property, biogenetics, new forms of 
 apartheid and growing world poverty show that we still need the 
 Marxian notion of class. He concludes that there is an urgent need to 
 renew Marxism and to defend its lost causes in order to render 
 problematic capitalism as the only alternative (Žižek 2008, 6) and the 
 new forms of a soft capitalism that promise, and in its rhetoric  
 makes use of, ideals like participation, self-organization, and 
 co-operation, without realizing them. Žižek (2010, chapter 3) argues  
 that the global capitalistcrisis clearly demonstrates the need to 
 return to the critique of political economy. Göran Therborn suggests  
 that the “new constellations of power and new possibilities of 
 resistance” in the 21st century require retaining 

Re: [Fis] CfP: Marx is Back - The Importance of Marxist Theory and Research for Critical Communication Studies Today

2011-07-21 Thread Matutinovic, Igor (GfK Croatia)
Dear Shu-Kun

I am afraid that  planned/communist + democracy combination is not attainable 
- a kind of contradiction in itself. Beacuse of their complexity, 
industrialized economies must have a combination of market and planning to 
function within socailly acceptable range. Markets are moreover important as a 
vehicle for economic and technological change and adaptation. Once you have 
markets, you have a degree of income inequality (not necessarily of the US 
range), your have property rights, and a degree of economic pressure on all 
agents (a striking difference from economic administration implied in central 
planning).
All this is not compatible with the basic ideological foundations of communism. 
Besides, democracy imples that on elections the voters may vote against the 
very institutions that have the attributes of planned/communist (whatever 
these mean) - they may vote against socialism. This outcome is not originally 
intended by communist ideology - the communism being the final stage of 
historic development - according to Marxist historicism. To be frank, Santiago 
Carillo, the legendary head of the Communist Party of Spain and the promotor of 
Eurocommunism in the Seventies, was ready to accept such a democratic 
challenge (at least in theory).

The best
Igor

-Original Message-
From: Dr. Shu-Kun Lin [mailto:l...@mdpi.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 7:41 PM
To: Matutinovic, Igor (GfK Croatia)
Cc: christian.fu...@uti.at; Christian Fuchs; fis@listas.unizar.es
Subject: Re: [Fis] CfP: Marx is Back - The Importance of Marxist Theory and 
Research for Critical Communication Studies Today

Dear Igor,

Dictatorship and democracy is another topic we need to discuss. Maybe there are 
4 combinatorial systems:

planned/communist + democracy (Is this the most ideal one?) planned/communist + 
dictatorship (USSR?, North Korea) free market/capitalism + dictatorship (China 
now?) free market/capitalism + democracy (Most of the Western countries, now)

Best regards,
Shu-Kun

On 21.07.2011 17:54, Matutinovic, Igor (GfK Croatia) wrote:
 It is easy to forget some important facts about the presumed sustainability 
 of planned/communist, historical and current economies. The Soviet block had 
 an immensly polluting industry which paid almost no attention to the 
 environemntal nor human health. Citizen protests, unlike the NGO acitivity 
 inthe West, were banned. The most ecologically  destructive economic project 
 recorded so far inthe world  - the draining of the Aral Sea was done in the 
 USSR - an entirely planned disaster!

 Under Mao, Chinese population was subject to periodic starvation and their 
 economy, despite planning efforts was moving in no direction at all. It is 
 after gradually implementing capitalist institutions since Deng Xiaoping 
 reforms that China become second world economic power and lifted at least a 
 couple of hundred of millions from poverty. In the meantime China is 
 destroying its environment - the consequnce of joint impact of wild 
 capitalism and communist planning (Three Gorges Dam project was initiated 
 under Mao but had economic means for realization only under the capitalist 
 institutions). North Corea is starving periodically its population and depend 
 on foreign aid.

 These former and current communist economies can not be role models for 
 sustainability in any sense. About the quality of life and human rights in 
 former USSR there is a plenty of evidence from those who lived there, and 
 very few of them feel pity for its collapse.

 Capitalism and free market economy, if not regulated will for sure deplete 
 all the nonrenewable resources.
 However, besides planning, which has been very present in the post WWII 
 capitalist economies I do not believe that we can learn much from the former 
 communist systems.

 The solution may lie in the change of the predominat Western wordview, which 
 is overconfident in technological fixes and dominated by materialist and 
 economic values. Our societies lack substantial environental values and we 
 miss the non-material aspects of the quality of life. This is a legacy of 
 modernity, and a communist ideology pertains to this legacy, and therefore 
 has been equally unfriendly to environemnt.

 Igor Matutuinovic


 -Original Message-
 From: fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es
 [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] On Behalf Of Dr. Shu-Kun Lin
 Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 4:40 PM
 To: christian.fu...@uti.at; Christian Fuchs
 Cc: fis@listas.unizar.es
 Subject: Re: [Fis] CfP: Marx is Back - The Importance of Marxist
 Theory and Research for Critical Communication Studies Today

 Some very quick comments: This is extremely interesting topic. I have
 this idea also since 2008 when I was reading and considering a lot
 about sustainability. Capitalism and free market economy, if not
 regulated or revised by adding some elements of socialism (Maxism or
 communism) and planned economy, will for sure deplete all 

Re: [Fis] CfP: Marx is Back - The Importance of Marxist Theory and Research for Critical Communication Studies Today

2011-07-21 Thread Christian Fuchs
Hello,

I believe Shu-Kun is right that there can be different combinations of 
economic and political systems. But I think the matter gets even more 
complex because we can have democratic economies and undemocratic 
economies, depending on how the production process is organized and 
managed. I think what Marx imagined is what later in political theory 
was called participatory democracy, where democracy is extended to the 
economy in the form of self-management. This was not the reality in the 
USSR. I think the matter is today what Marx's theory of crisis, labour, 
capitalism can tell us about the contemporary sitatuon, as well as how 
one can use his theorization of technology, knowledge production, media, 
ideology and culture and his concept of dialectics. There is today a big 
interest in Marx, so if we want to discuss foundations of information 
(society), we should in my opinion engage with him. tripleC's special 
issue is a call for such engagements ...
I think an excellent foundation for such an engagement is Terry 
Eagleton's new book Why Marx was right, which discusses and 
deconstructs 10 common held prejudices against Marx (that he was in 
favour of dictatorship, a reductionist, determinist, etc).


Best, Christian

Am 7/21/11 7:40 PM, schrieb Dr. Shu-Kun Lin:
 Dear Igor,

 Dictatorship and democracy is another topic we need to discuss. Maybe
 there are 4 combinatorial systems:

 planned/communist + democracy (Is this the most ideal one?)
 planned/communist + dictatorship (USSR?, North Korea)
 free market/capitalism + dictatorship (China now?)
 free market/capitalism + democracy (Most of the Western countries, now)

 Best regards,
 Shu-Kun

 On 21.07.2011 17:54, Matutinovic, Igor (GfK Croatia) wrote:
 It is easy to forget some important facts about the presumed
 sustainability of planned/communist, historical and current economies.
 The Soviet block had an immensly polluting industry which paid almost
 no attention to the environemntal nor human health. Citizen protests,
 unlike the NGO acitivity inthe West, were banned. The most
 ecologically destructive economic project recorded so far inthe world
 - the draining of the Aral Sea was done in the USSR - an entirely
 planned disaster!

 Under Mao, Chinese population was subject to periodic starvation and
 their economy, despite planning efforts was moving in no direction at
 all. It is after gradually implementing capitalist institutions since
 Deng Xiaoping reforms that China become second world economic power
 and lifted at least a couple of hundred of millions from poverty. In
 the meantime China is destroying its environment - the consequnce of
 joint impact of wild capitalism and communist planning (Three Gorges
 Dam project was initiated under Mao but had economic means for
 realization only under the capitalist institutions). North Corea is
 starving periodically its population and depend on foreign aid.

 These former and current communist economies can not be role models
 for sustainability in any sense. About the quality of life and human
 rights in former USSR there is a plenty of evidence from those who
 lived there, and very few of them feel pity for its collapse.

 Capitalism and free market economy, if not regulated will for sure
 deplete all the nonrenewable resources.
 However, besides planning, which has been very present in the post
 WWII capitalist economies I do not believe that we can learn much from
 the former communist systems.

 The solution may lie in the change of the predominat Western wordview,
 which is overconfident in technological fixes and dominated by
 materialist and economic values. Our societies lack substantial
 environental values and we miss the non-material aspects of the
 quality of life. This is a legacy of modernity, and a communist
 ideology pertains to this legacy, and therefore has been equally
 unfriendly to environemnt.

 Igor Matutuinovic


 -Original Message-
 From: fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es
 [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] On Behalf Of Dr. Shu-Kun Lin
 Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 4:40 PM
 To: christian.fu...@uti.at; Christian Fuchs
 Cc: fis@listas.unizar.es
 Subject: Re: [Fis] CfP: Marx is Back - The Importance of Marxist
 Theory and Research for Critical Communication Studies Today

 Some very quick comments: This is extremely interesting topic. I have
 this idea also since 2008 when I was reading and considering a lot
 about sustainability. Capitalism and free market economy, if not
 regulated or revised by adding some elements of socialism (Maxism or
 communism) and planned economy, will for sure deplete all the
 nonrenewable resources. I understand now why many people (including
 the father and the brothers of my grandmother from a rich landlord in
 China) from rich families or capitalist families sacrificed their
 lives for the revolutionary cause of communism. North Korea people
 live in a much more sustainable way than other countries. (Democracy
 and