Saturday, September 7, 2019

Adam Booth - Marxism vs Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)

Adam Booth doesn't like MMT, but I can't see how there will ever be worker controlled, government run state. 

For example, when MMT talks about the state, what kind of state is being referred to? As Marx noted in the Communist Manifesto, under capitalism, “the executive of the modern state is nothing but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie”.
If we want a government that will run the economy in the interests of ordinary people, then we need a workers’ state. But where in MMT is the role of the organised working class in running and managing society?
Lenin once remarked that capitalism, far from being a democracy, represented the ‘dictatorship of the banks’. But instead of overthrowing this dictatorship, MMT’s advocates suggest replacing it with another: the dictatorship of one bank – the central bank.
In this future vision of the MMTers, who would be in charge of this omnipotent central bank – the working class or the capitalist class? Similarly with the big monopolies that dominate the economy under capitalism. Are these to remain in private hands, producing for profit?
A national bank, directing society’s resources around the economy, would certainly be a vital element of a socialist plan of production. But in this setup, such a bank would have to be under the control of the working class. Is this what MMT’s supporters envision? 


AXEC / E.K-H said...

Links on Karl Marx

The age-old problem with economists is that they are strong on opinion but weak on knowledge and that they suffer from mental incontinence, that is, the unstoppable urge to blather about any issue between heaven and earth, that is, from crime, addiction, psychology, sociology, philosophy, religion, literature, ethics to their heroic fight for the welfare/freedom/survival of humanity. Fact is, though, that economists have to this day NO idea how the economy works. Walrasianism, Keynesianism, Austrianism, MMT are mutually contradictory, axiomatically false, materially/formally inconsistent and all got the foundational economic concept of profit wrong. Marx and Marxians are NO exception. For details see

The economist as storyteller

Karl Marx, fake scientist

Profit for Marxists

Marx, the moron

Dear idiots, Marx got profit and exploitation wrong

Here is the long-overdue scientific death certificate for Marx and Marxists

Marx’s bicentennial ― nothing to discuss, nothing to celebrate

200 years in the dark ― how Marx got it wrong

Capitalism, poverty, exploitation, and cross-over exploitation

If we only had classes

Socialism and scientific incompetence

MMT and Marxism: A debate between proto-scientific zombies

Marx and the curious coexistence of provably false economic theories

Marxism is one of four instances of Derponomics

Who is really a scientist?

The Law of Economists’ Increasing Stupidity

Good news for the one-percenters

The end of political economics (I)

Ricardo and the invention of class war

Mathematical Proof of the Breakdown of Capitalism

No future for Socialism and Capitalism

Note on Amy Willis ‘Can majoring in philosophy make you a better person?’

Egmont Kakarot-Handtke

Bob Roddis said...

I am quite glad to inform average people that MMT is now associating itself with Marxism which was responsible for 100 million innocent people being slaughtered in the 20th Century.

Keep up the good P.R. work!

Kaivey said...

Communism is reaction to bad capitalism. If the ruling elite take too much, there's a rebellion. No one really wants communism, except the desperate.