Também são, mas posso opinar menos sobre esses (ou
quase nada), o que esse pessoal aqui tá precisando é
conhecer um pouco mais sobre outras formas de
pensamento, que devem convergir em alguns pontos,
não
em todos. E talvez seja importante uma visão menos
instrumentalista.
Abraços, e vão ler outra coisa além de man pages
(vê
se não levam isso ao pé da letra).
--- paduamelo [EMAIL PROTECTED] escreveu:
Genial e denso mesmo é isso aqui, escrito mais de
150 anos antes de qualquer debate sobre trabalho
imaterial, sobre conhecimento como mercadoria,
sobre
ciência como força produtiva (Habermas). sobre
capitalismo informacional (e suas contradições
insolúveis!)...
The exchange of living labour for objectified
labour
i.e. the positing of social labour in the form
of
the contradiction of capital and wage labour is
the ultimate development of the value-relation and
of production resting on value. Its presupposition
is and remains the mass of direct labour time,
the quantity of labour employed, as the
determinant
factor in the production of wealth. But to the
degree that large industry develops, the creation
of
real wealth comes to depend less on labour time
and
on the amount of labour employed than on the power
of the agencies set in motion during labour time,
whose powerful effectiveness is itself in turn
out of all proportion to the direct labour time
spent on their production, but depends rather on
the
general state of science and on the progress of
technology, or the application of this science to
production. (The development of this science,
especially natural science, and all others with
the
latter, is itself in turn related to the
development
of material production.) Agriculture, e.g.,
becomes
merely the application of the science of material
metabolism, its regulation for the greatest
advantage of the entire body of society. Real
wealth
manifests itself, rather and large industry
reveals this in the monstrous disproportion
between the labour time applied, and its product,
as
well as in the qualitative imbalance between
labour,
reduced to a pure abstraction, and the power of
the
production process it superintends. Labour no
longer
appears so much to be included within the
production
process; rather, the human being comes to relate
more as watchman and regulator to the production
process itself. (What holds for machinery holds
likewise for the combination of human activities
and
the development of human intercourse.) No longer
does the worker insert a modified natural thing
[Naturgegenstand] as middle link between the
object
[Objekt] and himself; rather, he inserts the
process
of nature, transformed into an industrial process,
as a means between himself and inorganic nature,
mastering it. He steps to the side of the
production
process instead of being its chief actor. In this
transformation, it is neither the direct human
labour he himself performs, nor the time during
which he works, but rather the appropriation of
his
own general productive power, his understanding of
nature and his mastery over it by virtue of his
presence as a social body it is, in a word, the
development of the social individual which appears
as the great foundation-stone of production and of
wealth. The theft of alien labour time, on which
the
present wealth is based, appears a miserable
foundation in face of this new one, created by
large-scale industry itself. As soon as labour in
the direct form has ceased to be the great
well-spring of wealth, labour time ceases and must
cease to be its measure, and hence exchange value
[must cease to be the measure] of use value. The
surplus labour of the mass has ceased to be the
condition for the development of general wealth,
just as the non-labour of the few, for the
development of the general powers of the human
head.
With that, production based on exchange value
breaks
down, and the direct, material production process
is
stripped of the form of penury and antithesis.
The
free development of individualities, and hence not
the reduction of necessary labour time so as to
posit surplus labour, but rather the general
reduction of the necessary labour of society to a
minimum, which then corresponds to the artistic,
scientific etc. development of the individuals in
the time set free, and with the means created, for
all of them. Capital itself is the moving
contradiction, [in] that it presses to reduce
labour
time to a minimum, while it posits labour time, on
the other side, as sole measure and source of
wealth. Hence it diminishes labour time in the
necessary form so as to increase it in the
superfluous form; hence posits the superfluous in
growing measure as a condition question of life
or
death for the necessary. On the one side, then,
it
calls to
