< < <
Date Index > > > |
capitalism? by Alan Spector 17 March 2002 02:58 UTC |
< < <
Thread Index > > > |
There seems to be some confusion about "capitalism." If
this seems to be a presumptuous statement by me, then let me revise it to say
that I HAVE SOME CONFUSION ABOUT HOW THIS DISCUSSION ON WSN IS GOING....
No attack meant....I'll admit that the confusion is mine.
I believe that Marx had many important insights into the
"scientific method as applied to social institutions, social processes, and
social change" (dialectical materialism applied to the social world). His
analysis of the problems of capitalism, crisis of overproduction, tendency for
systems to choke on their own (twisted, perverted, polluted, distorted)
"prosperity", how processes reach limits and become opposite, how productive
systems become ANTI-productive and destructive, suppression of science &
technology, rise of war, dictatorship, killing of "excess populations", need for
revolution to eliminate the state as tool of the exploiters, etc. etc. etc. as
well as understanding alienation as the root of human oppression coming out
of class society, and the role of consciousness, etc. There is a lot
there that I think is useful, much more than many of the "neo-Marxists" who like
aspects of the dialectical method (sort of) but who reject those core concepts
that separate Marx's views from Hegel's.
However, Marx was not a god--he was doubtless wrong on many
things. At the risk of committing heresey in front of some of my Marxist
friends, I would not insist that Marx fully understood the political-economy of
China of the 14th century, etc., and the sometimes oversimplified explanation of
Asiatic Mode and slavery leading to feudalism then capitalism (which I believe
does have some useful explanatory power) certainly is oversimplified and,
as expressed by some contemporary Marxists does not take into account unevenness
and contingencies, which can be HUGE factors upsetting a neat theory. I don't
think that the core of Marx's overall perspective is saved or destroyed by
whether or not China had a more powerful economic system than Europe in the 11th
century.
So, like most others who find much useful in Marx, I
accept some things, don't necessarily accept others, and believe that those
who accept what I reject are being dogmatic and those who reject what I
accept are revising Marx too much.
Having expressed that self-reflective mode of thinking, and
trying to be open about the possibilities, I nevertheless DO believe that there
are certain aspects of the way that economic processes function that are
different now from 800 years ago.
Problems of oppression, which virtually all members of
the WSN list are very sensitive to, (including agfrank--why do you think he and
others put so much effort into exposing how devastating economic inequality
is to to many millions?)---this oppression is not simply the result of
instrumentalist, corrupt oligarchies -- nasty rich people who just like to take
from the laboring classes. There are patterns within the capitalist
system that spin out of the control of capitalists themselves. It is true that
without a revolutionary vision and a revolutionary movement, the various wars
and economic collapse will result in other "capitalists" taking advantage of the
situation and consolidating power. So in that sense, it is not completely out of
the control of all the capitalists. But there are processes distinctive to the
situation in the world today, as opposed to 800 years ago, aren't there?
Maybe these comments are missing the point. I'm simply trying
to "boil the discussion down" so that I can understand if there are core
disagreements on these questions, and if so, what those core (no pun intended),
what those fundamental differences are.
Alan Spector
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
< < <
Date Index > > > |
World Systems Network List Archives at CSF | Subscribe to World Systems Network |
< < <
Thread Index > > > |