Lenin & Accounting-Autonomy versus heteronomy

glevy at acnet.pratt.edu glevy at acnet.pratt.edu
Wed Jul 12 17:37:40 MDT 1995

Hans wrote:

> Thus, if it is possible to absent the coercive forces of markets,
> socialism should be just as commitment to absenting the coercive forces
> of (civil society) social relations.  It seems to me that the first step
> is then to minimize the required civil society contribution.  That is to
> minimize the working day or better working week to just a few hours.

I am going to concentrate on the last sentence cited above in Hans's post.

For the above to happen, we either have to assume abundance (a *highly*
unrealistic assumption in the forseeable future) or a lower standard of
living (a possibility *if* citizen workers will accept this tradeoff).
Overall, this scheme strikes me as highly impractical and utopian (at
least in the extreme form that you have presented above).  If this is
what we need to have socialism, let's give up now.  Do you really believe
that the *first* step should be the one you indicated above?


     --- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---


More information about the Marxism mailing list