In my recent debates with RD, NJ, and Lark, these gentlemen advocate preindustrial (artisan, peasant) production as a means to mitigate capitalism's horrors. They reject my Marxist proposals to retain the ultra-abundant mode of production that capitalism has developed.
Concurrently, RD and Lark (not NJ) reject my call for job rotation. RD is even on the record as saying that 'a professional porter... is a multi-facetted and skilled task, that engages mind and spirit.' Lark, of course, has had his share of similar bloopers. And NJ, while accepting rotation on principle, does defend petty proprietorship (10% to 20%).
It occurs to me that while I advocate keeping capitalism's mode of production (i.e. industrialized, centralized abundance) yet abolishing its social relations (i.e. hierarchy, private ownership of the means of production)---a consistent Marxist program---, these gentlemen urge instead abolishing capitalism's mode of production while retaining its social relations. And that's what I call petty-bourgeois 'socialism.'