This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Slrubenstein (talk | contribs) at 01:28, 7 February 2002. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 01:28, 7 February 2002 by Slrubenstein (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Excellent explanation of the "global" perspective:
- Some argue that capitalism does not exist as an independent system in any one country, and that one must analyze it as a global system. They further argue that when examined as a global system, capitalism is still organizing and exacerbating the gulf between rich and poor
Also there is a point of view that an emerging nanotechnology is a next stage in development of means of production, because it'll make a manual labor unnecessary and so it will completely change a mode of production. -- AVB
- Within Marxist thought, capitalism is defined by the alienation of labor power, not by the amount of manual labor. Also, marx characterized capitalism as the most revolutionary system because the means of production were constantly changing. In other words, a new technology, like nanotechnology, is not sufficient to create a new mode of production, indeed it is completely consistent with this mode of production. And whether people are working at home or in factories or behind desks is secondary to whether people own the technologies they rely upon, and whether people sell their labor (for wages or salaries). Capitalism has changed tremendously in the past 200 years, and will continue to change. But IF you use Marx's notion of mode of production, I do not see how nanotechnology will change the mode of production, SR