2 ms·
Yes, he contradicts himself. Your quote clearly implies design, and then he concludes with this: >If someone had designed a work regime perfectly suited to mai
by ddeck 13y ago
Yes, he contradicts himself. Your quote clearly implies design, and then he concludes with this:
>If someone had designed a work regime perfectly suited to maintaining the power of finance capital, it’s hard to see how they could have done a better job... ...Clearly, the system was never consciously designed. It emerged from almost a century of trial and error.
There are some good points in the analysis, but it would be more compelling if it didn't hint at some sort of elite conspiracy.
- aidenn0 13y agoThe usage of "as if" like that means to me that he doesn't thinl k it's really what happened. He is using a similie.
- richardjordan 13y agoJust like when scientists use words like design and God - it's not literal it's figurative. The author's pretty clear he doesn't think a committee of plotters sat down and mapped out our road to ruin. See my earlier comment. He's merely describing a stable attractor. A feature of the system which creates local maxima which are hard to escape from. An involuntary alignment of interests which means that individuals acting on their own behalf reinforce a system which has less than ideal characteristics, without themselves either thinking through the larger collective consequences or supporting them.