[P2P-F] Fwd: [NetworkedLabour] Work/Hack/ers' ethic according to Bogdanov

[Michel Bauwens]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Orsan <orsan1234 at gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 3:26 AM
Subject: Re: [NetworkedLabour] Work/Hack/ers' ethic according to Bogdanov
To: Anna Harris <anna at shsh.co.uk>
Cc: networkedlabour at lists.contrast.org


As Sochor goes on;

"To be sure, Bogdanov's alternative was not without its own problems. He
predicated many of his hopes for socialism on technological progress,
which would
alter both the work process and work relations, thus paving the way for
"cultural liberation." This position left Bogdanov open to the criticism of
"technological determinism." Something of a crude technological bent was,
in fact, apparent in his search for all- encompassing "organizational
principles," leading him to declare, for example, that relations between
humans and their tools were similar to those between humans.18 In addition,
he seemed little aware that a world of engineers, operating in a highly
rationalistic style, pro- duce its own sources of alienation. Nevertheless,
Bogdanov devoted his practical efforts to culture and aesthetics rather
than to technology and the organization of labor. Indeed, he attempted to
develop "proletarian culture" in a country that could boast only of minimal
technological progress. Even according to his own scheme, he might be
labeled utopian. It seems that Bogdanov assumed technological advance was
essential to sustaining change in authority relations but not nec- essarily
to initiating it.

Another problem in Bogdanov's scheme was the underrating of political
power. Because he downgraded the significance of the seizure of power as a
precondition to the transition to socialism, he exposed himself to charges
of reformism. Although he did not deny that revolution was a means of
change, it is certainly true that his systems thinking was much more in
line with incremental change. He also tended to view political power as a
resource, fully in keeping with the systems perspective, rather than as a
potential means of domination. He was blind to some of the realities of
political life and clearly no match for Lenin in political maneuvering.

The merit of Bogdanov's alternative lies not in a successful answer to the
question of how to create utopia but in an aler\ness to the ob- stacles to
utopia. In particular, Bogdanov attempted to find means to overcome these
hurdles rather than denigrate utopia. Perhaps this at- tempt is the most
that could be expected, from even the most zealous believer in socialism.
In fact, if there is any "social usefulness" to utopian thinking, it may
very well be, as Kolakowski argues, to "anticipate things that are
impracticable now in order to make them prac- ticable one day in the
future."19

Bogdanov's concerns reflected the basic problems in Marxism that continue
to plague the socialist world. Despite, or perhaps because of, the
existence of several countries that call themselves socialist, there
is an ongoing
debate on what constitutes the essence of socialism. The two conceptions
that seem to predominate among contemporary Marxists split along the same
lines as did those of Lenin and Bogdanov, with one emphasizing public
ownership and party control, and the other the end of human alienation."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20160209/f3ebaa45/attachment.htm