Did I ruffle a few feathers? :)

Louis N Proyect lnp3 at columbia.edu
Thu Sep 21 12:20:55 MDT 1995

On Thu, 21 Sep 1995, Chris M. Sciabarra wrote:

> 	I still believe however, that many ecological problems could be
> addressed in the context of the rule of law, rather than the rule of a
> planning board.  If corporations have to PAY for their pollution, and pay
> dearly, they will be compelled to try other means for either cleaning up
> their pollution, or, for non-polluting methods of production.  It is

I guess I'm a hide-bound Marxist when it comes to these sorts of
questions. I don't see much distinction between the government and
corporations. Even the most cursory study of Clinton's career will go a
long way to explain why Arkansas' rivers are filled with chicken-shit.
The problem with your approach, Chris, is that it ignores the way
capitalism operates in practice and substitutes an idealized model of the
system that has never existed.

Also, you have to be much sharper in your understanding of "pollution". I
am not talking about smoke-stack emissions. I am talking about a society
that revolves around the private production and sale of
internal-combusion engine automobiles. The American people need decent,
ecologically aware transportation, but late capitalism is completely tied
up with the airline, automobile, trucking and oil business. This is not
something that can be redressed by fines, it can only be redressed when
those who produce the wealth of this society take control of the means of
production and democratically decide what and how things are produced.

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


More information about the Marxism mailing list