discussion/mode of production: socialism - reply to CB

Paddy Apling e.c.apling at btinternet.com
Fri Nov 14 10:57:52 MST 2003

Charles Brown in message Sent: 13 November 2003 21:29
Subject: discussion/mode of production: socialism - reply to CB
> Anyway, the productive forces and instruments of production don't develop
> themselves. They are developed by people. So, basically you would
> be saying that it is the scientists and engineers and toolmakers who make
> revolutions.
> >-clip-

AND quoted

> _____
> Mel:
> The reason the forces of production - material power of  production, did
> develop unfettered in the Soviet Union are complex, but in its
fundamentality -
> the basic reason is because the evolution of the material power of
> is not driven by property relations but the scientific revolution. Having
> public property relations does not magically mean your society is going to
> invent  the transistor or discover nuclear power or the semiconductor.
> discoveries are products of the scientific revolution - accumulated
> knowledge, not the  result of property relations as such.
> ^^^^^^^^
> CB: But this scientific revolution is carried out by people. So,
> this would
> mean that the class of people who initiate revolutions are
> scientist-engineers-toolmakers.
> Mel: In this sense the Soviets were
> culturally backwards to a considerable degree.

Paddy's comment:

Charles and Mel (tho' arguing) are ABSOLUTELY right.  It IS scientists and
technologists - whatever their POLITICAL attitudes at any given moment - who
are constantly CREATING revolution - revolutions in the way people live; in
the resources they have available; in the incompatibility of the new
developments with the idiocy that these are controlled by the few to oppress
the many instead of for the benefit of mankind generally.  The scientists
and technologists cannot CARRY OUT the political revolution - but (whatever
their views) they are forever creating the conditions FOR IT......

Unfortunately, of course, for political reasons (??) there are always some
scientists who use pseudo-scientific arguments for reactionary purposes
(often, unfortunately, it is just to get grants for their work !!)

Which is why it is so necessary for progressive (and particularly Marxist)
scientists and technologists to argue strongly against anti-science and
non-scientific circulating generally, and among the "left" in

NFHS Member #5594
Mailto:e.c.apling at btinternet.com
or http://www.e.c.apling.btinternet.co.uk

PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.

More information about the Marxism mailing list