Re: [OPE] socialist planning in capitalist firms

Engelskirchen: *Nove’s vision of socialism is feasible because it doesn’t challenge the defining features of capital – he doesn’t challenge the separation of productive entities and he doesn’t challenge the separation of working producers from their conditions of production.  To do either of these, he thinks, would be utopian and romantic, not to say irresponsible. So, as he acknowledges, his feasible socialism likely is not really any different from capitalism with a human face.* ‘Feasibility: Capable of being accomplished or brought about; possible.’ A feasible path to socialism doesn’t exclude n-possible-worlds from which to choose one. Philosophy is essential to make that choice but it has to be properly circumscribed by our knowledge of the laws of nature. Otherwise, philosophy becomes a trap which drives us to catastrophe (this is pretty much what happened with actually existing socialism).   So, I’m interested in the very valuable contribution of applied philosophy to make the right choice. Unfortunately, I think you are beyond this and advocating a lost cause.   By the way, capitalism is not an homogenous entity and I doubt we can label certain market economies capitalists, should we keep minimum rigorous criteria to understand what’s going on in the world economy.  A. Agafonow

_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
Received on Sat Jun 12 08:14:13 2010