Enkidu asks

Quote:

 Does agriculture aim at the satisfaction of human needs? Well, in capitalism the answer is “no”! It is simply the production of commodities whose content and quality don’t matter so long as they find a place on the world market and allows the cheaper reproduction of labour power.

Given the condition of much of the food we eat,  the colourings, the anti-biotics, the various chemicals added to improve taste or appearance, but also the "accidental" contamination by  heavy metals and radioactive material and the like,  which, as Enkidu describes are all actually poisons we would do well to avoid,  I'm somewhat put off wanting to eat anything much again !   And as to "the cheaper reproduction of labour power" which the bourgeoisie so eagerly pursues - well   (1) where is there any food thats cheap these days?  And (2) where  is the "reproduction" process if in fact we're all gradually being  poisoned off by one means or another?  Is the bourgeoisie not stabbing itself in its own feet and poisoning the thing it lives off?      But perhaps there's malice aforethought  and machiavellianism at work here?  Given the enormous explosion in population growth taking place at the  moment; given the surplus, tiresome and unrequired work force lazing about; given the absence of conveniently large wars providing umbrellas for mass destruction of populations and constant capital; given that an undefeated working class might suddenly reawaken one day to its historic task and overthrow the whole rotten and disgusting system - if the bourgeoisie hasn't  destroyed the planet in the meantime - then the subtle poisoning  of us all (or just plain starvation for third-worlders and the austerity hit unemployed in "civilized" countries)  this slow death by poison as in some gothic horror tale could well  be the only solution left for the crisis ridden bourgeoisie.   The final "final" solution for capitalism.  Kill everybody.