According to Matt Huber, "In many ways, this civilizational challenge is a straightforward example of Karl Marx’s thesis that capitalist social relations of production (private property and the profit imperative) will “fetter” the needed development of the productive forces. The transition away from fossil fuels requires new productive forces, but capitalist property relations hold us back. But first, we should be clear on which productive forces are needed in the first place."
Huber's understanding of Marx's thought on the forces and relations of production is "orthodox" and wrong. I discussed " Matt Huber's and Leigh Phillips's 'classical Marxist critique' of Kohei Saito ( https://econospeak.blogspot.com/2024/03/matt-hubers-and-leigh-phillipss.html ) " at EconoSpeak in March 2024. The error lies in the fetishization of technological implements as "forces of production." A machine is not a productive force; it is an objectification of productive forces. A nuclear reaction is not a productive force; it is an objectification of productive forces. Productive forces are human capabilities: skill, knowledge, strength, cooperation, perception. I would argue that the "civilizational challenge" is to free our thinking from the fetters of the ideological short cut that misattributes to the products of human labour the "productive force" that is, in fact, a feature of social individuals. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#39638): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/39638 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/116655555/21656 -=-=- POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. #4 Do not exceed five posts a day. -=-=- Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/13617172/21656/1316126222/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
