Skip to main content

View Diary: On inequality and education (57 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  What Will Destroy Capitalism? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    The British Empire came and went, and capitalism endured.

    "H.R.W.A.T.P.T.R.T.C.I.T.G -- He really was a terrible president that ran the country into the ground."

    by Reino on Sat Jul 07, 2012 at 10:01:54 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Capitalism will destroy capitalism. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      hepshiba, pacplate, NoMoreLies

      If you want some of the important details of this you should take a look at some of my other diaries.

      The fundamental part of it is this: the capitalist system cannot continue to exploit a finite planet indefinitely and continue to expect profits.

      Economic growth (averaging boom and bust periods) has been declining for four decades now.  When it gets below zero and is in constant contraction, will you still call it "capitalism"?

      No fuel turns a profit like crude oil or coal, so the capitalists plan to mine all the coal and burn all the crude oil.  Do you know what the planet will look like then?

      Take a look at the video -- it will explain what the to-do is all about, in grim detail.

      Now I suppose we could still have "capitalism" with most of the human race wiped out.  But, generally speaking, disasters of that sort tend to motivate social transformation.  I fully expect one -- there will be plenty of losers.  There are doubtless plenty of losers right now, as record temperatures are putting old folks in their graves as we speak.  But today's record heat wave is just the beginning.

      Right now you've got a bunch of zombie corporations whose main motivation is to preserve the existing economic situation because they've cut sweet deals with the regulators to hide their insolvency.  What happens when they can't pay for AC anymore?

      Paul Prew:

      The question to be asked, really, is whether we proceed with capitalism until we reach an ecological bifurcation point that leaves the habitability of the earth in question for the vast majority of the population, or we reach a social bifurcation point that leads us to a social system of production that is dissipative, nonetheless, but does not threaten the flowing balance of nature.
      Capitalism threatens the flowing balance of nature by being too acquisitive.  The technosocial transformations it instigates today are not making its process more robust, so the organic component of capital remains high.  Genetic engineering will not lead to a new era of cheap food.  Alternative energy will not replace the 85 million bbl./day cheap oil habit at lower cost.  The Internet is better for giving things away than it is for selling them.  The world's real estate can only be suburbanized once.  The ecological room for capitalist expansion is vastly smaller than what it was four decades ago.  Anyone who tells you otherwise is just echoing PR.

      "A people who know how to organize the accumulation of wealth and its reproduction in the interest of the whole of society, no longer need to be governed." -- Peter Kropotkin

      by Cassiodorus on Sat Jul 07, 2012 at 10:33:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Actually, Capitalism mutated and adapted (0+ / 0-)

      it certainly didn't endure in its pre-1939 form. The right wing, for all its manifold stupidities, is at shrewd enough to recognize this fact. Which is why it is hell bent on returning to those halcyon days of yore by eradicating all vestiges of the New Deal and The Fair Deal. For them, everything since FDR, if not Lincoln, has been Socialism.

      Nothing human is alien to me.

      by WB Reeves on Sat Jul 07, 2012 at 11:54:58 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site