I don't have a hard copy of the Grundrisse so I can't look up that page, but is the logic similar to the view associated with Marglin, Bowles and others about how technology is relevant to how much input is extracted or to the bargaining power of different groups, and therefore inefficient technology is most profitable? Or is it a different sort of argument? I've seen a statement of Marx about how most inventions since 1830 were made to increase capital's dominance of labor quoted alot.
> Cuneiform was developed to promote state power -- that is, to do the > accounts for the > state. Around p. 700 of the Grundrisse, Marx has a wonderful section > describing how > "people's technology" -- as Doyle calls it -- would actually make the > economy more > efficient. That section offers a wonderful window into the way that > capitalism > defeats its supposed purpose -- to develop an efficient economy. > > I am working on a new book, The Procrustean Economy: Breaking out of the > Iron Cage of > Capitalism, to get a handle on this subject. > > Economics Department > California State University > Chico, CA 95929 > > Tel. 530-898-5321 > E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu >
