Skip to content


June 19, 2013


And the reason you would have for doing this, as a planner in the cerebrum of the New Industrial System of Production (Galbraith), is so the corporations you serve have enough time to make profits off of previous stages of technology and the consumer products that were produced-because if you simply surge ahead to produce what you have the technical capacity to deliver, you would render obsolete a whole series of first stage products that would no longer be of value to consumers.

And it becomes necessary-out of common sense-to control the pace of the developement of consumer products based on new technologies-to the point, quite obviously, that the economic sector itself must come together –probably informally-to guarantee that there is time to actually reap the profits of previous technical and industrial toil –and from the original investments that had made it possible.

Because technology and industrial production is all about, ultimately, selling products as its final stage.

Why would you go to all that trouble-enormous trouble and effort-to develop a car, for example, based on certain technical advancements that will eventually lead to other more advanced forms of the same technology-you can already see this from a technical standpoint and as an engineer-if you can’t at least get your investments back regarding the early stages?

And capitalism is never about just getting your investments back-don’t ever forget that.

And in your logical need to make profits, it seems to have been historically clear that the fact that the delay you need to impose for financial reason, forcing millions of people to continue to suffer, or somehow be prevented from enjoying greater material comfort, was never computed or factored into the decision making process within the New Industrial System of Production.

And you have an elaborate technical and financially sound conceptual scheme-at the greatest of industrial scales-that is based, nevertheless, on the need to see millions of human beings deprived, for a time, of a better material quality of life, although this is never reflected-of course-in the numbers of your calculations, in your management decisions and in your corporations quarterly shareholder reports, either.

For how can you measure in numerical terms the suffering or inconvenience as permanent vital frustration of millions of fellow human beings?

And as the greatest business school professors-apparently-like to repeat, if you can measure it you can manage it, becomes also true in its corollary version: what you can’t measure has no meaning-does not exist-from an industrial management standpoint.

But a better question that should be asked is how could this vision of the Harvard MBA as Nazi death camp guardian ever find its way up to the pinnacle of democratic governments that publicly purport to serve human progress?

Why is this spirit and scientific ideology the philosophy of power itself at the current point in human history?

Do you not see how dumb and inefficient-even from a practical standpoint-these people really are?

You better be quick about it because they won’t be around for very much longer:



From → III, NOW

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s