Skip to main content

View Diary: Anti-Capitalist Meetup: On "The Making of Global Capitalism" (84 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  found this useful in Gindin/Panitch's response (8+ / 0-)
    On the contrary, we were concerned with how and why other sovereign states became imbricated with the informal American empire through their own sponsorship of capitalist accumulation and social relations.  And this applies not just to Europe and Japan in the postwar era, but, as we show at length in Chapter 11, to China as well as other states of the ‘developing world’ in the contemporary era.

    The initiative for this, we repeatedly emphasise, did not necessarily come from the US, but also from state elites and capitalist classes who facilitated the making of global capitalism within their own societies via integration with the informal American empire (‘imperialism by invitation’).

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "If we appear to seek the unattainable, then let it be known that we do so to avoid the unimaginable." (@eState4Column5)

    by annieli on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 03:11:33 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Imperialism by invitation. (6+ / 0-)

      I think that hits the nail on the head and is a brilliant expression from the authors.  

      “While we do our good works let us not forget that the real solution lies in a world in which charity will have become unnecessary.” ― Chinua Achebe . . . {Economic Left/Right: -9.12 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.77}

      by diomedes77 on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 03:22:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  diomedes - given your statement that (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        diomedes77, northsylvania

        capitalism requires massive government to keep it alive, would your ideal of a socialist economy require a much smaller government to operate equitably?

        "let's talk about that" uid 92953

        by VClib on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 04:55:20 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes, over time. (6+ / 0-)

          And that was Marx's goal, too. For socialism and its twin, democracy, to become so natural, so internalized, that the state apparatus would become virtually unnecessary and could be set aside.

          Other keys would be that a truly socialist economy would be simplified. There would be far fewer parts to it. It would be localized, small is beautiful, and based on C-M-C and use-value, rather than our current M-C-M and exchange-value model.

          We would produce what we needed, and need what we produce. We'd cut waste dramatically. And we'd do our best to make the economy recede into the background of our lives, and replace its dominance with the pursuit of other things, like friendship, love, family, local gatherings, education, music, the arts, cultural venues, etc.

          We would work to live, not live to work. With a far less volatile economic system, far less government is needed to manage it. And with real democracy in place, especially at the local level outward, far less bureaucracy overall is required.

          In short, yes. Real socialism means far less "government."

          “While we do our good works let us not forget that the real solution lies in a world in which charity will have become unnecessary.” ― Chinua Achebe . . . {Economic Left/Right: -9.12 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.77}

          by diomedes77 on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 05:14:44 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Thanks for a very thoughtful answer (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            diomedes77, NY brit expat

            Would the transition require a more substantial government?

            What happens to all the assets owned by individuals and businesses given that under the 5th amendment the government couldn't simply take them.

            "let's talk about that" uid 92953

            by VClib on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 05:21:57 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Quick response. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              NY brit expat, VClib

              I really need to run, but will return to this tomorrow.

              Short answer: My idea would be to transition to an all public means of production this way:

              The government offers goods and services directly. It doesn't take assets away from individuals or businesses -- other than via taxation. It just offers better products and services, for less, and makes it far too attractive not to switch. It also makes it far too attractive to work for anyone but the public sector. Human rights, workers rights, civil rights, etc, etc. are all adhered to, as are environmental protections and working harmoniously with nature.

              So, you get a better deal as workers and consumers, and you basically attract the population over to your "team," so to speak.

              In my view, ownership of the means of production only applies to business. It does not apply to one's home or private assets. Everything is in the "commons" except for that.

              Over time, inequalities fade, and without gaps in salaries, those with private mansions and so forth won't have the means to keep them up. Eventually, they'll have to turn them over to we the people. This has happened for different reasons to aristocracies across the globe, even within the capitalist system. They turn their estates over to "the state."

              Without even a shred of capitalism in place -- as in, it would be entirely gone -- the rationale for private ownership of these estates would fade and then disappear altogether.

              More later. If you're around tomorrow, would be happy to continue this discussion.

              “While we do our good works let us not forget that the real solution lies in a world in which charity will have become unnecessary.” ― Chinua Achebe . . . {Economic Left/Right: -9.12 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.77}

              by diomedes77 on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 05:37:55 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  Now that quote (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      NY brit expat, diomedes77, annieli

      makes me want to read the book. The march of globalised capitalism seems to point toward conspiracy and machination by the American and British financial elite. However, CT has its downside as a working theory in that someone somewhere would have leaked some information confirming some process beyond the prevalence of Goldman Sachs personnel in various European governments.
      This quote dovetails nicely with UnaSpenser's observation last week about individuals under capitalism:

      Capitalism has infected the national body. We've been living with the infection for so long that it is now a chronic illness in an advanced form. We have stopped fighting it. In fact, we have developed an auto-immune disorder wherein we're defending it rather than the healthy version of ourselves.
      The spread of virulent capitalism is not a conspiracy, but is self inflicted by both individuals and nations, despite its malignant, and eventually fatal nature.

      "The 'Middle' is a crowded place - that is where the effective power is - the extreme right and left might annoy governments, but the middle terrifies them." Johnny Linehan

      by northsylvania on Mon Jul 21, 2014 at 12:40:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think we've been swimming in that soup (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        northsylvania, NY brit expat

        for so long, we don't even realize it any more. The soup is us. We are the soup.

        When I have discussions with people about alternatives to capitalism, all too many are aghast at even the thought. They simply think of capitalism like air. Like it's always been there and that we need it to survive. They don't really think of it as something that is fairly recent on the human scene, and will inevitably be replaced, just as it replaced violently replaced feudalism.

        It's pretty difficult to make any headway on a subject when people are so conditioned to accept its place in our lives. Slavery was the same way for a long, long time. Even people who didn't much like it thought it was crazy to even consider an alternative. It was "just the way things are."

        “While we do our good works let us not forget that the real solution lies in a world in which charity will have become unnecessary.” ― Chinua Achebe . . . {Economic Left/Right: -9.12 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.77}

        by diomedes77 on Mon Jul 21, 2014 at 08:25:56 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site