Change extension to .md

1 files changed, 0 insertions, 111 deletions

diff --git a/books/sociedade/post-scarcity.mdwn b/books/sociedade/post-scarcity.mdwn
deleted file mode 100644
index 4b1a1b0..0000000
--- a/books/sociedade/post-scarcity.mdwn
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,111 +0,0 @@
-[[!meta title="Post-Scarcity Anarchism"]]
-
-* Murray Bookchin.
-* Working Classic Series.
-* AK Press - 2004.
-
-## Towards a Liberatory Technology
-
-    The year 1848 stands out as a turning point in the history of modern revolutions.
-    This was the year when Marxism made its debut as a distinct ideology in the pages
-    of de Communist Manifesto, and when the proletariat, represented by the Parisian
-    workers, made its debut as a distinct political force on the barricades of June.
-    It could also be said that 1948, a year close to the halfway mark of the nineteenth
-    century, represents the culmination of the traditional steam-powered technology
-    initiated by the Newcomen engine a century and a half earlier.
-
-    -- 43
-
-    I have reviewed these technological developments because both their promise and
-    their limitations excercised a profound influence on nineteenth century revolutionary
-    thought. The innovations in textile and iron-making technology provided a new sense
-    of promise, indeed a new stimulus, to socialist and utopian thought. It seemed to the
-    revolutionary theorist that for the first time in history he could anchor his dream
-    of a liberatory society in the visible prospect of material abundance and increased
-    leisure for the mass of humanity. Socialism, the theorists argued, could be based
-    on self-interest rather than on man's dubious nobility of mind and spirit. Technological
-    innovation had transmuted the socialist ideal from a vague humanitarian hope into a
-    practical program.
-
-    The newly acquired practicality compelled many socialist theorists, particularly Marx
-    and Engels, to grapple with the technological limitations of their time. They were faced
-    with a strategic issue: in all previous revolutions, technology had not yet developed to
-    a level where men could be freed from material want, toil and the struggle over the
-    necessities of life. However glowing and lofty were the revolutionary ideals of the past,
-    the vas majority of the people, burdened by material want, had to leave the stage
-    of history after the revolution, return to work, and deliver the management of society
-    to a new leisured class of exploiters. Indeed, any attempt to equalize the wealth of
-    society at a low level of technological development would not have eliminated want, but
-    would have merely made it into a general feature of society as a whole, thereby recreating
-    all the conditions for a new struggle over the material things of life, for new forms of
-    property, and eventually for a new system of class domination.
-
-    [...]
-
-    Virtually all the utopias, theories and revolutionary programs of the early nineteenth
-    century were faced with problems of necessity -- of how to allocate labor and material
-    goods at a relatively low level of technological development.
-
-    [...]
-
-    The fact that men would have to devote a substantial portion of their time to toil,
-    for which they would get scant returns, formed a major premise of all socialist ideology
-    -- authoritarian and liberarian, utopian and scientific, Marxist and anarchist.
-    Implicit in the Marxist notion of a planned economy was the fact, incontestably clear
-    in the Marx's day, that socialism would still be burdened by relatively scarce resources.
-    Men would have to plan -- in effect -- to restrict -- the distribution of goods and would
-    have to rationalize -- in effect, to intensify -- the use of labor.
-
-    -- 44-45
-
-    The problem of dealing with want and work -- and age-old problem perpetuated by the early
-    Industrial Revolution -- produced the great divergence in revolutionary ideas between
-    socialism and anarchism. Freedom would still be circunscribed by necessity in the event
-    of a revolution. How was this world of necessity to be "administered"? How could the
-    allocation of goods and duties be decided? Marx left this decision to a state power,
-    a transitional "proletarian" state power, to be sure, but nevertheless a coercive body,
-    established above society. According to Marx, the state "wither away" as technology
-    developed and enlarged the domain of freedom, granting humanity material plenty and the
-    leisure to control its affairs directly. This strange calculus, in which necessity
-    and freedom were mediated by the state, differed very little politically from the common
-    run of bourgeois democratic radical opinion in the last century. The anarchist hope for
-    the abolition of the state, on the other hand, rested largely on a belief in the viability
-    of man's social instincts. Bakunin, for example, thought custom would compel any individuals
-    with antisocial proclivities to abide by collectivist values and nedds without obliging
-    society to use coercion. Kropotkin, who exercised more influence among anachists in this
-    area of speculation, invoked man's propensity for mutual aid -- essentially a social instinct
-    -- as the guarantor of solidarity in an anarchist community (a concept which he derived from
-    his study of animal and social evolution).
-
-    The fact remains, however, that in both cases -- the Marxist and anarchist -- the answer
-    to the problem of want and work was shot through with ambiguity. [...] but given the
-    limited technological development of the last century, [...] both schools depended on
-    an act of faith to cope with the problem of want and work. Anarchists could argue against
-    the Marxists that any transitional state, however revolutionary its rethoric and democratic
-    its structure, would be self-perpetuating; it would tend to become an end in itself and
-    to preserve the very material and social conditions it had been created to remove. For
-    such a state to "wither away" (that is, to promote its own dissolution) would require
-    its leaders and bureaucracy to be people of superhuman moral qualities. The Marxists,
-    in turn, could invoke history to show that custom and mutualistic propensities were never
-    effective barriers to the pressures of material need, or to the onslaught of property,
-    or to the development of exploitation and class domination. Accordingly, they dismissed
-    anarchism as an ethical doctrine which revived the mystique of the natural man and his
-    inborn social virtues.
-
-    -- 46-47
-
-    That the socialist notions of the last generation now seem to be anachronisms is not
-    due to any superior insights that prevail today. The last three decades, particularly
-    the years of the late 1950's, mark a turning point in the techological development,
-    a technological revolution that negates all the values, political schemes and social
-    perspectives held by mankind throughout all previous recorded history. [...] As we shall
-    see, a new technology has developed that could largely replace the realm of necessity
-    by the realm of freedom.
-
-    -- 48
-
-    Almost every account of applied automation today must be regarded as
-    provisional: as soon as one describes a partially automated industry,
-    technological advances make the description obsolete.
-
-    -- 56