Re: the Frank challenge

so the question is: what is the ontological status of capitalism ?

here some sniplets from other lists

[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bhaskar on ontology, epistemology and judgmental rationalism

Bhaskar views himself as an "underlaborer for the sciences," in
the sense that he strives to provide them with a philosophical
groundwork which recognizes that knowledge is socially
produced, but refuses to lapse into the notion that the world is
entirely socially or discursively constructed, maintaining instead
that for the most part the world (including the social world) is
independent of our thought.

Among Bhaskar's major points is the distinction between the
world as an object of thought, and our thought about it. Closely
following this is the idea of ontological stratification: critical
realism maintains that reality is *not* all on one level, that of
experience, consciousness, or discourse (language/meaning).

Instead, the world is highly stratified, and at its foundation are
numerous underlying structures and so called "generative
mechanisms" which possess various powers and susceptibilities.
(They range from physical ones such as atomic and chemical
structures, to biological ones like physiological and ecological
systems, to social structures such as the mode of production and
sex/gender relations.)

Powers and susceptibilities are causal properties, and in fact
Bhaskar argues that what defines something as "real" is not its
perceptibility (or knowledgeability), but its *causal efficacy*.
Such structures and mechanisms interact in various ways,
resulting in actual events; and some events become experiences.
So consciousness and its contents are the tip of the (ontological)
iceberg, the contingent products of a diversity of underlying
dynamics and conditions.

Bhaskar calls these ontological strata the Real, the Actual, and
the Empirical.  The upshot is that there really is a real world
outside our minds, we really do have access to it, but much of
the world cannot be perceived by the senses, and so knowledge
of it is often indirect and requires thought, skilled observation,
and *work*--which supports the position that knowledge is
socially produced, and incidentally also means that it's quite
possible for a theory to be wrong.

Knowledge, being the result of social practices, is necessarily
shaped by the history, society and social position from which it
emerges: Bhaskar calls this "epistemic relativism."  However, the
fact that theories are socially conditioned and transient does *not*
imply that there are no grounds for preferring one theory over
another.  Bhaskar rejects such "judgmental relativism" (viz. the
notion that all beliefs are equally valid): on the contrary, the
evidence drawn from the world remains, and we decide which
theory most adequately accounts for it, a position dubbed as
"judgmental rationalism".

To the distinction realisms generally make between things and
our thinking about them, critical realism adds the insistence:
"therefore we must be fallibilist".  No dogmatism follows from a
commitment to the *truth of things*.  Because we have recourse
to the truth of things, we can resolve differences between us
by appeal to them, rather than to adhere to violence.

Anyone of us approaches any question, no matter what the
level of expertise or genius, from a very limited perspective.
We need the insights of others.  If we stop with epistemic
relativism, then there, in the face of our inevitable differences,
force decides.

At least the commitment that "how things are does not depend
on our views of them" opens the possibility of judgmental
rationalism: we can appeal to the truth of things.  We can
put litmus paper in liquid to resolve our dispute.

     --- from list bhaskar@lists.village.virginia.edu ---


[2]-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
W. Robert Needham:

The Essentials of Capitalism

Private ownership of the means of production and their use for private 
profit

1. Standard definition:

"...under capitalism ownership of the means of production is vested with
one set of indi-viduals while work is performed by another ... the buying
and selling of labour power is the differentia specifica of capitalism." P.
Sweezy, The Theory of Capitalist Development: Principles of Marxian
Political Economy, (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1942), 56.


2. C.B. Macpherson's moral corollary:

"...a capitalist society...compels a continual net transfer of part of the
power of some men to others, thus diminishing rather than maximizing the
equal individual freedom to use and develop one's natural capacities which
is claimed [by the proponents of capitalism]." C.B. Macpherson, Democratic
Theory: Essay in Retrieval, 10-11.


3.      And related Macpherson states:

  "Šwhen the liberal property right is written into law as an individual
right to the exclusive use and disposal of parcels of the resources
provided by nature and of parcels of capital created by past work on them,
and when it is combined with the liberal system of market incentives and
rights of free contract, it leads to and supports a concentration of
ownership and a system of power between individuals and classes which
negates the ethical goal of free and independent individual development."
C.B. Macpherson, Property: Mainstream and Critical Positions, 199-200.


4. Capitalism as Governance:

"Capitalism, more than a system of resource allocation and income
dis-tri-bution, is a system of governance." S. Bowles and H. Gintis,
Democracy and Capitalism: Property, Community and the Contradictions of
Modern Social Thought, (New York Basic Books, 1987), xi.


5. Mander's Consistent List:

Jerry Mander, "The Rules of Corporate Behaviour," in J. Mander and E.
Goldsmith, eds., The Case Against the Global Economy and for a Turn Toward
the Local, (San Francisco: Sierra Club Books 1996),  309-322.

1.      the profit imperative ("Šthe ultimate measure ŠIt takes precedence
over community well-being, worker health, public health, peace,
environmental preservation, or national security." Recall (see the
Introduction to this book, page 4) the differences between the negative
freedoms desired by workers and society within capitalism and the positive
freedoms of capital against workers and society.)

2       the growth imperative (p. 316-to exist is to grow larger and more
powerful,"Šthe world's few remaining pristine places are sacrificed to
corporate production. The people's who inhabit these resource rich regions
areŠpressured to give up their traditional waysŠŠBanks will resist funding
companies that limit their growth.ŠCorporate culture" abhors limiting goals
and profits.")

3.      competition and aggression (p. 316-"[externally]Šyou must
aggressively push to win against the other corporations [and internally]
Šyou must be ready to climb over your own colleagues.")

4       amorality (p. 316-317-"Not being human, not having feelings,
corporations do not have morals or altruistic goals. [they]Šseek to hide
their amorality and attempt to act as if they were altruistic, [though]
ŠThey have little interest in community goals except the ones that serve
their purposes. ŠWhen corporations say we care it is almost always in
response to the widespread [perception that they do not care. And they
don't. How could they? ŠAll their acts are in service to profit.")

5.      hierarchy (p. 317-top down management decision making, "Šrarely
questioned Š [though] Šeffective, non-hierarchical modes of organization
exist on the planet and have been successful for millennia.")

6.      quantification, linearity and segmentation (p. 318-the only
'values' that are important are quantifiable for profit purposes , e.g.,
"automobile manufacturers evaluating the safety level of certain production
standards calculate the number of probable accidents and deaths at each
level of the standard. The number is then compared with the cost of
insurance payments and lawsuits from dead driver's families" etc.; workers
are mere cogs in the corporate wheels)

7.      dehumanization (p. 318-the employee is objectified and dehumanized,
depersonalized,),

8.      exploitation (p. 319-"Karl Marx was right: A worker is not
compensated for the full value of his or her labour; neither is the raw
material supplierŠWhile the worker earns a wage, the owner of capital
receives the benefit of the worker's labour plus the surplus profit the
worker produces, which is then reinvested to produce yet more surplus.Šthe
formula remains intact profit is based on paying less than actual value for
workers and resources"),

9.      ephemerality and mobility (p. 319-existence beyond time and space
"Having no morality, no commitment to place, and no physical natureŠthe
traditional idea of community engagement is antithetical to corporate
behavior"),

10.     opposition to nature (p. 320-the control of nature and the
transmogrification of what is extracted from nature.

11.     homogenization (p. 320-of choice and of cultures).

                  --- from list PSN<psn@csf.colorado.edu> ---