[ show plain text ]
Re Paul C's [OPE-L:3246]:
A couple of quick points:
a) Under laws of motion of the capitalist system, you indicate
-- tendency of increasing rate of exploitation
-- tendency of the rate of exploitation to fall
Was this a typo? If so, what did you want to write? If not,
then how can both tendencies exist at once?
b) Going back to the original literary use of the word, you
write that a robot is nothing but a worker, a universal
worker and suggest that it can be understood as abstract
Yet, I have a definition which suggests that a "robot"
is a Czech word for slave:
"Robot: Mechanical device that behaves like a man.
Comes from the Czech word meaning slave. Was first
used to mean mechanical man in a play by Karel
Capek, a famous Czech playwright. The play is about
a world that ends in disaster because robots which
replace workers and soldiers are used for profit and
not for the good of mankind" (UAW-CIO, _Automation:
A Report to the UAW-CIO Economic and Collective
Bargaining Conference held in Detroit, Michigan
the 12th and 13th of November, 1954_, p. 37
That doesn't sound like abstract labour to me. Have
you read the book? Do you disagree with the claim that
"robot" was originally a Czech word meaning slave?
In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 31 2000 - 00:00:10 EDT