To be fair to Edgar Hardcastle, he was writing in 1983, when the human population of the planet was only around 60% of its current level. But apart from one or two brief nods to material limitations which would preclude holidaying on the moon, and a mention of soil erosion, he 'absolutely' does not deal with the material limitations of our planet. There are far more references to rapid increases in production and the need for them. It's not surprising, of course. The fantasy of 'free access', which has long been the main point of difference between SPGB socialism and most of the other varieties, cannot be reconciled with any serious consideration of the ecological limitations and consequences of human productive activity. Because if you attempt to do so, the entire edifice of SPGB ideology crumbles. But, Steven, you are no longer an SPGB member. So you can now attempt to deal with this question yourself, free from the fetters of SPGB rectitude. Can you provide a convincing argument to show that the 7.8 billion humans on our planet can produce enough to permit 'free access' without destroying the biosphere? You may not convince me, but, who knows, you may convince someone else...