Look at this more as a call to re-think than as a concrete proposal. How would this actually work in practice? Is it a practical solution. How could it be implemented? Would it be desirable to implement it? Who would gain and who would lose? Is it fair? Etc.
As the Occupy movement keeps developing, it seeks solutions for the economic and political dysfunctions it exposes and opposes. For many, the capitalist economic system itself is the basic problem. They want change to another system, but not to the traditional socialist alternative (e.g. USSR or China). That system, too, seems to require basic change.
The common solution these activists propose is to change both systems' production arrangements from the ground up. Every enterprise should be democratized. Workers should occupy their enterprise by collectively functioning as its board of directors. That would abolish the capitalist exploitative system (employer versus employee) much as our historical predecessors abolished the parallel exploitative systems of slavery (master versus slave) and feudalism (lord versus serf). [emphasis added]
Read the rest at TruthOut
by Richard D. Wolff, Truthout | Op-Ed
Wolff sees modern capitalism as a transition to the next step of human progress and political liberalization — a step that present circumstances indicate is potentially imminent.
What Wolff does not consider and which has to be a major consideration is capital formation and allocation. Is the present market solution optimal? If not, how can it be improved, or does it need to be re-engineered? If "capitalism" is a stage of history — and we know that nothing is permanent — what is the next iteration?
What is the relation between capitalism and democracy. Are they intrinsically dependent as neoliberalism claims? Are they antithetical as opponents assert, claiming that late stage capitalism results in plutocratic oligarchy? What happens as workers become increasingly marginalized due to productivity increases resulting from technology — automation, robotics, and, soon, AI?
How does MMT fit into this?
6 comments:
Richard Wolff is a socialist. He's one of the few economists who understand Marxian economic theory.
Resource allocation in a democratized economy would be based on human need instead of profit.
MMT would complement the materialist analysis, which is concerned with the availability of real resources.
I enjoy reading Michael Hudson's views as his analyses of economic history reflect an understanding of human behaviors (which probably only appear to be more cunning/ sophisticated today than they may have been several millennia BC).
FRIDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2011
Michael Hudson: Debt and Democracy – Has the Link Been Broken?
By Michael Hudson,
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/12/michael-hudson-debt-and-democracy-has-the-link-been-broken.html
very interesting indeed. Much to chew on here and sit with.
As I have read and understand Marx it is not about wealth distribution. It is about equalized productive capabilities. Back then in heavily manufacturing-based economies, that meant land ownership and access to capital.
Today in our more service-based economy it appears land has been substituted with access to market share. Access to capital will always be an issue but these days ventures are much more scalable then ever before so you can very start small and grow....that is if it wasn't for lack of access to market share. In sense it comes down to advertising. And that is directly related to the bailouts and corruption in Washington and big business, etc. The big guys are closest to the teets if you will and that skews the entire economy perpetually. And it is that closeness to government that Marx continually states is the problem and creates alienation and division and class warfare. In a sense, as I read Marx, he more small-government (I imagine him preferring the term blind-government) than anyone realizes and he also truly believes and stands by the premise that all men ARE created equal more than anyone I see today.
Also Tom, you may be interested to hear about the latest and greatest news about our cell phones spying on us.
Here are some links you may be interested in at least checking out. Strange days have tracked us down!!!
http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/11/12/01/dont-spy-me
http://act2.freepress.net/sign/carrier_IQ/
"What Wolff does not consider and which has to be a major consideration is capital formation and allocation. Is the present market solution optimal? If not, how can it be improved, or does it need to be re-engineered?"
The present "market" solution is far from optimal under criteria of reliability of civilization and ensuring a minimal standard of life for all. Going post-capitalist (below) should substantially increase the formation and allocation of capital along these criteria.
"If "capitalism" is a stage of history — and we know that nothing is permanent — what is the next iteration?"
If capitalism is defined as a society where the "employer-employee relationship" is prevalent, then the next stage of history or post-capitalism will be societies where the "employer-employee relationship" is not prevalent, or is totally absent.
This precludes an arrangement like the former USSR and similars: according to the above definition, those were extreme forms of capitalism where everybody was a employee and nobody was a employer.
"What is the relation between capitalism and democracy. Are they intrinsically dependent as neoliberalism claims?"
The most one can say of contemporary political systems is that they are representative. Democracy can be representative, but being representative does not warrant democracy. Even former and remnant "communist" countries had and have representative political systems. And as it seems the number of "parties" in the system is quite irrelevant. The connection between capitalism and representative systems has some intricate history.
"Are they antithetical as opponents assert, claiming that late stage capitalism results in plutocratic oligarchy?"
Capitalism and present day political systems are not antithetical but symbiotic.
"What happens as workers become increasingly marginalized due to productivity increases resulting from technology — automation, robotics, and, soon, AI?"
Either working time is reduced or people will walk away of the system.
"How does MMT fit into this?"
As a progressive approach to political economy which will give people the option of going on with "human face" capitalism for the time they want at the same time assuring the possibility of peaceful minimal cost transition into post-capitalism.
I'm surprised C. H. Douglas's ideas haven't been revived in the last few years
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C._H._Douglas
Post a Comment