It's the Capitalism, stupid.

[garybeck]

Lately I've been thinking, what we're seeing with the Bush administration, should really be *expected* considering our economic system. I don't mean to take any blame away from the criminals who perpetrate these crimes and start unnecessary wars, but I wonder if it's inevitable under Capitalism.

Capitalism, by definition means to "capitalize." In other words, think up a product that people will buy. it doesn't matter if they need it or if it serves any purpose. It only matters that people will purchase it. (the "Thneeds" made by the Onceler in Dr. Seuss's Lorax story comes to mind). Then, hire some people to make it, and capitalize on them by paying them the least amount possible. Then, capitalize on the consumers by charging the highest price you possibly can entice them to buy it at. Do everything you can to minimize costs and increase profits. Of course, government plays a vital role in regulating your business and setting parameters and rules you must comply with, to prevent you from using slave labor and things like that.

But when you reach the point where your product is selling and everything is in place, you have to capitalize more. Capitalize on any opportunities to take market share from your competitors. Think up more products that people will buy and repeat the process. It's a never ending drive to increase revenue at all costs. Capitalize, capitalize, capitalize.

Some would argue that this process evokes innovation - people invent new and more efficient ways to manufacture products. But I would argue that the driving force in most cases is to increase profit, not make products that are necessarily more useful or beneficial to society. All that matters is, "will it sell?"

After years of this, huge corporations will emerge, which have been playing this capitalism game for generations. They have exhausted all all their innovative efforts, cut every corner, increased their profits as much as they can.

Now it's time to explore new ways to capitalize.

One is to expand beyond the boarders of the country. Cheaper labor, new markets, less corporate regulation; these things exist overseas and we've already seen a huge shift in this direction of the last 10 years.

So now it's time for the "final frontier" for the capitalists - taking over the very government that has been regulating it all this time.

All these rules and regulations are nothing more to the corporations than something that stands between them and higher profits. Changing the laws would mean more money.

It is a natural course of events in a system set up like this, that these huge corporations would go after the government at this point. Since government is highly influenced by campaign contributions and other sorts of money flowing from here to there, and the corporations have money to give, they will first try to influence government officials through traditional and mostly legal methods.

But eventually, they will realize that they actually need some of "our boys" directly in high-level government positions, so that they can be assured the laws will favor them, thus creating new ways for them to capitalize.

Whatever it takes, they pick their man and send him to be "the decider" for them. The stakes are so high, it doesn't matter how he gets into office. Just find a way. Steal the election, lie, make promises you know aren't true; do whatever it takes.

Now, we are seeing what I believe is the natural progression of living in a country with a capitalist economy.

It starts with encouraging people to think up a product, make it as cheaply as possible, and sell it for the highest price possible. It ends with a corporate takeover of the government.

Is there any benefit to this system? The bottom line is "will it sell?" rather than "what benefit to society does this offer?" The inventor of the "Pet rock" is seen as a genius, and gets rich, while solar panels "cost too much" even though they could solve many environmental and economic problems.

We should have seen this coming, and I'm sure some people did. I knew it was going to be bad when Bush got into office but I didn't realize how bad until it actually happened. But the point is, Capitalism breeds insatiable greed. The horrific events we're seeing today are inevitable. It will happen. It will never end until the last tree is cut down and the last law limiting corporations is abolished. Under this system, it will happen. It's inevitable. It just happens to be occurring now, which makes it rather distressing for us.

So yes, I blame Bush and all his cronies for all this mess. But I also think some of the blame has to be put on the system that inevitably creates the situation we face today.

Am I saying "Marx was right?" Does this make me a communist? Or a socialist? I don't know enough about it all to say. But I do believe that if it weren't Bush/Cheney, the corporations would keep trying to get someone like them into office and we'd just be facing something like this 4 or 8 or 12 years later. A system based on rewarding greed is inherently flawed.

It seems the "American experiment" of which Capitalism is a central theme, has failed. It's clear to me that if we are going to get out of this mess, we are going to have to change the system itself.

[sinkingfeeling]

1. Yes, Americans now define themselves by their consumerism. We have

very little national identity without capitalism.

[stellanoir]

2. As a really lousy capitalist

I have to agree with you that " A system based that rewards greed is inherently flawed." I would only add that it encourages selfishness as well.

rec'd

[garybeck]

4. greed and selfishness

go hand in hand. I agree.

[stellanoir]

7. the of all the "isms"

My personal fave would be humanism. That's what the all the world, aside from those abusing power, is longing for.

[silverweb]

3. Well said!

You've defined the situation very well, more clearly than I've read in quite some time.

:thumbsup:

[Jim Warren]

5. My reading of Marx

has it that he was prescribing a socialist system as the eventual antidote after the excesses of an over-ripe capitalist began to manifest and eat it's own.

Socialism should follow capitalism, not the other way around, as experienced by the eastern bloc that never developed the full means of production. (Yes I realize they were bankrupted with the cold war)

[garybeck]

6. right, and didn't he predict that

the way from Capitalism to Socialism usually involves a (violent) revolution?

[Jim Warren]

8. That I cannot say

Honestly, from my reading of Marx, the feeling I got was more of an accountant than a warrior.

Maybe it's more well known than I think, but Marx traveled through-out industrial New England notating labor laws and working conditions in the factories there. In Das Kapital there are long narratives about and from the LAWS OF THE GENERAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS concerning child labor laws, etc.

[sweetheart]

9. He was for the union in the civil war

He viewed it as a version of that revolution, slaves being freed and all.
He noted the instinctual links between london and its news media, and supporting
the slavery states. It is not suprising, given that history, that blair supports
bush. The monarchists never liked that slave rebellion after all.

[Jim Warren]

10. 'tis so

Marx lived the remaining years of his life in England.

As usual, poignant observations sweetheart.

[sweetheart]

14. I went to visit the house where he was born

It was crowded with Chinese visitors when i was there, go figure. :-)

I have a feeling the new form of capitalism will come from china. America has not
been able to integrate the criticism, and for that, it is as economically fragile
as the soviet union was before it broke up. Maybe bush is the new gorbachev,
and the 50 states can go it on their own after he's finished.

[Jim Warren]

33. Prescient perhaps.......

Those are such interesting observations with manifold possible conclusions.
I am now reminded of seeing somewhere recently a photo of Chinese tourist at that house.

Certainly A new form of capitalism is afoot in China, the question remains how is will mature.
One thing that is depressing as hell is so far, aside from workers rights which is where the interest in Marx will come in maybe, is the horrendous disregard for the environment there.

And the implications of bush fulfilling something resembling the Gorbachev model is no less than mind-bending.

[RUZIK1]

37. Violent Revolution?

No  he did not. Marx saw the process as an inevitable lash of
social forces. His scientific socialsim was based on the
dialectic. The old order produces and sows the seeds of its
own change or dsestruction. Agrarian societies evolved into
towns and trading and then into urbanization and guilds and
into state controlled mercantilism and into
liberalism/captitalsim . The danger is an evolution where the
corporations gain sway over labor and  institute control
through the form of facisim. That's is where we are now.There
was no revolution to achieve those things. The happening in
1776 was one ruling class(Liberals) fighting with another
ruling class in  Great Britain (a combo there of
Mercantislists and Capitalists). Great Britain has since gone
on to institute the dialectic with a more socially  democratic
state than the rude colony.In the US , the Thesis (capital) is
too strong for the Antithesis (labor control) to produce a new
thesis.

[RUZIK1]

36. Marx

Thanks for the evidence of intelligent life out there. I am
glad to find people who have read something. The dialectic is
apace, albeit, temporarily slowed down or even halted in the
US. Who knew that TV could make the wage slaves believe that
they were Capitalist? Only Aldous Huxley?
Americans , even the handmaidens of the Capitalists in their
McMansions, are in for serfdom with million dollar mortgages
as "investments"

[Jim Warren]

42. Heh-heh

Wise ol' Ruziki

[CanSocDem]

11. Just being Anti-Capitalist is a good start.

Even though our governments are closely watching the various global experiments in repression, there are people like you who are studying global experiments in democracy. Argentina is a good example today as Cuba was/is in the 60's and 70's.

http://auto_sol.tao.ca/node/view/2

Google Naomi Klein for a film called "The Take" about a workers takeover of the factories in Argentina after the collapse of the economy.

[eppur_se_muova]

12. Capitalism is a religion, capitalism is a tool.

That's Capitalism -- with a big "C" -- that is a dogmatic system of belief, just like "big-C" Communism, both of which reject, indeed seek to destroy, any other form of belief. It is the belief that Only Money Counts, and those with the most money count the most.

It's capitalism -- little "c" -- that is a useful tool, the tool praised by Adam Smith, a tool which does not require the exclusion of other tools, beliefs, or systems. It is not the universal solution to every problem, nor even a good solution to every problem, nor even a solution at all to some problems. Use it when it works well, set it down in favor of another tool when that works better. This does not constitute a rejection or a criticism of capitalism. capitalism without arbitrary restrait has accomplished great things, but capitalism without moral or legal restraint from malicious excess has destroyed lives and happiness on an unmatched scale.

Capitalists chant the mantra of "Free Markets" to defend their policies, but indulge in endless machinations to make sure that they themselves never have to face a truly free market. A nation/society that employs capitalism as a useful tool to meet (at least some of) the needs of society is wise to place some restraints on otherwise free markets -- just as vigorous sports contests are wise to enforce rules of safe and fair play, and appoint referees for that purpose. The overwhelming majority of citizens of democratic countries seem to prefer some variation or another of a restrained free market, a capitalist game with fairly abundant and powerful referees, and one that "stops the game" when play gets too rough. When a player is down on the field, suddenly everyone wants to be a socialist (small s, no flames, please) -- as they should. Capitalists, Free Marketeers, claim they want a game with no timeouts, no referees, and no rules, and appeal to a sort of displaced bloodlust to sell their vision to the little players, who like to dream that they are really big players inside (It's always the other guy who's going to get his throat cut, while I smile and quip "survival of the fittest"). In reality, the "Free Marketeers" have have bought off the referees, rewritten the rules, and control the clock. There is no chance of winning against them, and no way out of the game, except for the fact that it's not a game anymore. It's a labor camp.

[sweetheart]

13. the difference between Capitalism and Communism

"The ideological war between capitalism and communism during the second half
of the twentieth century was not a conflict between totally different ideologies.
It was, rather, a civil war between two extreme viewpoints of the same Western
ideology; the search for happiness through the material progress disseminated by
the Industrial Revolution . . the cost of the Soviet version of development was
shortages and lack of freedom; today, that of the neoliberal, capitalist variant
is unemployment and social exclusion."

- Oswaldo de Rivero, Peru's WTO ambassador (sorrows of empire pp:261, chalmers johnson)

[Terran1212]

15. The psuedo-capitalism of America, to be exact

At least under a truer capitalism the power circle at the top would change a bit more. Here they are entrenched.

[treestar]

16. Cronyism isn't capitalism

The right wing claims it is capitalism, and we therefore despise it. We should. But the label is wrong. We despise cronyism.

Capitalism on its own works fine. Look how much more we have now than we had in 1900.

It's using the government to run everything that creates the cronyism and the corruption and gives capitalism a bad name when it's not really capitalism that they are going by.

[sweetheart]

17. oh, micing words with marx

Capitalism IS cronyism IS fascism in its degenerate aspect.

Long its been a collaboration of elite clans of tyrants and oppressors to keep a
mutually assured repression on their respective populations... kapitalism, in whatever form.
Freedom to be broke in walmart with 2 dollars for a day's food (for your kid too).

[garybeck]

18. capitalism evokes cronyism

they go hand in hand

[cigsandcoffee]

20. So does communism...

...or socialism, or whatever. A system is only as good as the humans that make it up, and the problem lies far more in human nature than anywhere else.

[garybeck]

21. so I guess we're just plain screwed.

the real problem is greed itself and human nature.

but I still have hope.

[rman]

26. Actually

The system itself is a major factor - all systems that recent history has seen have one property in common: centralized power.
The problem with centralized power is that it is near impossible to stop it when those who hold the power start abusing their power.

[xchrom]

29. cronyists are capitalists who want to keep the ball in their park.

[rman]

30. Yet the current system does have distinct capitalist characteristics,

don't you agree?
Which isn't to say that all characteristics of capitalism are bad.

It seems to me we're all using different definitions of capitalism, which doesn't help the discussion about it.

[Wilms]

19. K&R n/t

[Blue_Tires]

22. well said n/t

[AJ9000]

23. Maybe unrestrained capitalism

is the real problem.

And what economic system would you recomend? Any system will have flaws.

Also, couldn't one argue that capitalism is a system that rewards *ambition* hard work, ingenuity, and not just greed?

The problems we're having are that capitalism has become stronger than government, and has merged w/ it and/or come to control it.

That is one of the primary definitions of Fascism.

That could be fixed without scrapping our entire economic system, would you not agree?

[AJ9000]

24. Also, let's not forget about

the military aggression of non-capitalist countries such as the old Soviet Union.

[rman]

25. Trotsky decried Stalin's Russia for being capitalist -

it's just that government controlled corporations instead of private corporations were the capitalists.
Lenin and Trotsky never got around to actually implementing communism in Russia, and Stalin's Russia had nothing to with communism except in name.

[AJ9000]

40. rman, can you tell me what

countries actually did get around to succesfully implementing communism?

And does this mean you see the collapse of the old Soviet Union as a failure of *capitalism* in large part?

[garybeck]

35. Right, I didn't mean to imply that Capitalism is the only

economic system that breeds these types of problems. I just wanted to point out that in our situation, the system itself is partly responsible because people and organizations are rewarded for doing everything they can to capitalize on every opportunity. when all legal methods are exhausted, we enter into the realm of changing and breaking laws.

as others have suggested, human nature plays a role, and greedy people will do this sort of thing regardless of what economic system they are in. my point is that our economic system actually rewards greed, making the situation worse.

[malaise]

27. Well said n/t

[cassiepriam]

28. Remember how they told us to KEEP SHOPPING after 9/11??

I knew then that we were a country gone wrong....
capitalism was a failure....

[StellaBlue]

31. Totally agree.

Capitalism sucks.

[Armstead]

32. This is not inevitable under capitalism -- It's the fault of stupidity

I agree with you that things have gone way too far. But I disagree that it is an inevitable consequence of capitalism.

Rather thn an inevitable result of capitalism, we're seeing the result of stupidity and self-centerdness of a spoiled society that stopped paying attention. The problem is that fale values and illusory lies have been fed to America for at least 30 years in a giant CON Job.

Liberalism and progressive politics is the corrective to runaway capitalism. If it is working properly, it keeps the tendency towards excess undercontral and balances out the amorality of "markets" with more positive social values.

Any system -- socialism , capitalism, anarchism, collectivism -- becomnes a pain in the ass if it is allowed to go too far.

[RUZIK1]

34. Das Kapital

Right you are. But why did it take you so long to make such a
detailed analysis? You mention Bush's first term. The process
you have described has been told many times beginning with
Adam Smith and culmiunating in Karl Marx. The key terms are
Capital versus Labor. The only deviation has been the success
the Capitalists have had in destroying a weak labor movement
by doing some fairly subntle things such as calling everyone
with wage slave jobs , that includes managers, that they are
"professionals". There are hardly any pros around
outside a few plumbers and a few lawyers.

The rise of liberalism, which is synonomous with Capitalism,
has created mature old industries and without the
counter-valing weight of an intelligent labor force, serfdom
is where most Americans live. The USA is the most perfect
example of a fascist state, one where caiptal in the form of
corporations also controls the government. Bush's grandaddy
was a side kick of Hitler and his corporate backers. Can you
not wonder why George can quote Der Fuerher so glibly as in
his 1934 Reichstag speech "I have earned  political
capital and I mean to spend it" . That cannot have been a
coincidence! If we don't institute social democracy in the
country, beyond the promises of the New Deal, we are doomed to
become a land of serfs, saddled with incredible debt and
beholden to Bush and the 1%. Welcome to the Brave New World.

[rman]

38. "I have earned political and I mean to spend it"

Not that it really surprises me that W took that line from H.
But... darn, truth is stranger than fiction.

[Hidden Stillness]

39. Capitalism is the Enemy of Liberty and Equality

Unregulated capitalism, right down to the core, is not only the opposite of, but actively hostile to and an active enemy against, the interests of society. Caretakers seek to get medical help and treatment to patients; capitalists price the drugs and surgeries out of their reach. Reformers try to help the poor rise up out of their poverty; capitalists exploit their desperation with easily available gambling, alcohol, and check-cashing price-gougers. Law enforcement, victims' rights advocates, and animal lovers worry about increasing violence and cruelty in society; capitalists exploit the neurotic selfishness of abusers by providing them with rape, torture, humiliation, bomb-throwing, beatings and raging hate as "entertainment." People who want an educated civic population want free education and news, documentaries, books, available to all; capitalists sign restrictive, exclusive cable deals, requiring payment, they overprice books, magazines, etc., charge huge tuitions and then huge fees for loans to pay for tuitions. Women's rights advocates worry that girls feel ugly and inferior, caused by social and media pressure; capitalists exploit their hatred of self, by selling them makeup, diets, fad clothes, and on and on. People need reliable products that last years, as they can't afford to keep buying the same things over and over; capitalists want things to fall apart just after the warranty expires. People need good jobs and benefits; capitalists want unions busted and jobs outsourced. Societies need that those who can afford to pay for the support of a system pay taxes, that all will have it, and those who could never afford anything will have access to things, so that they can live a civilized, modern life; capitalists endlessly seek to shift thier taxes onto those who cannot afford it, cut programs that the capitalists do not use, and move their ilk ahead at the expense of all others.

When the only frame of reference is capitalist, not civic, then people are only a "market" or a drain. There is no collective, only individuals fighting each other, to cut services even more, to grab market share. Sales are no longer good enough; now they must be multiple percentage points ahead of everyone else, and all decisions are made to satisfy stockholders and management, not employees, not customers, and never society as a whole. Capitalism by its nature is exploitation by those who have the most money, and the fewest morals. The only way it works is when the democratic Government of the people has it in a straightjacket, and we control it with laws, regulations--and penalties.

[eallen]

44. Which explains all the freedom in non-capitalist states. Like....

I like very much like the line that reality has a well-known liberal bias. Or to put it another way, that we liberals stand in stark contrast to the raving wingnuts on the right, who reject evolution and any other part of science and empirical data that doesn't align with their religious views. Or for that matter, when it doesn't align with the market fundamentalism.

Alas, the fundamentalism that makes capitalism the source of all that is evil is just as wacky as the fundamentalism that makes it the measure of all that is good. You cannot name a single nation that simultaneously (a) thrived without a capitalist economy, and (b) had a high regard for civil liberty. Without exception, these go hand in hand. That would suggest to the reality-based observer that capitalism is somehow tied to freedom. That doesn't mean it is to be worshipped. But it makes hash of statements like "capitalism is the enemy of liberty."

Ah, well. Go spout your dogma. But please. Distinguish it from liberalism.

:hippie:

[Hidden Stillness]

46. Try to Read This Time, OK?

"Go spout your dogma"! Wow, an intellectual. It is not capitalism that has given us a middle class, a court system based on rights, a system of public education, or anything else. (By the way, capitalism does not equal a "State"; it is an economic system, not a government. Creepy.) If you had bothered to ask, rather than giving a snide attack, I might have been able to clear up for you that unregulated capitalism is a disaster, and is slavery. Only those systems that have economic regulations controlled by exactly those people who are not the capitalists, are worth living in, and it is because of the regulations, not in spite of them.

"Capitalism is somehow tied to freedom"..."Spout your dogma...Distinguish it from liberalism." Worshipping the "free" (that is, capital investments unrestricted) market as if it were government, then sneering at, and lying about, anyone who is tired of your "D"LC attempt to appear moderate when you are not, is very tired, and increasingly destructive to our Party. I live in Michigan, where your "D"LC has destroyed our union jobs and closed innumerable manufacturing plants, leaving us with fast food and supermarket jobs, while NAFTA moved our jobs to Mexico and etc. Your embarrassing attempt to paint me as a, what, Communist (?), although typical, with no attempt to learn anything about the sufferings of the Midwest because of unrestrained capitalists and no one who can oppose them, is just another reason why we need to get rid of the ever-hostile "D"LC, Inc.

[BlueEyedSon]

41. You left this out: the most direct way to increase revenue is via taxes

and deficit spending (once you have control of the govt). Why bother even making a product? Just TAKE the money from the people!

The biggest redistribution of wealth in history is underway.....

[thumos33]

43. Great post garybeck!

You are right. The problems that we are about to encounter as American workers are the necessary flip side of the outcome of a strong capitalistic system.

Capitalism must be lead by strong social systems that benefit the labor side of that economic system.

[leftofthedial]

45. money is the ONLY thing that matters anymore

Corporations have seized control of virtually everything. It is a LEGAL REQUIREMENT that they maximize stockholder returns. This legal requirement has been sold to us as a moral imperative, an unasailable good. It trumps truth, right, humanity--everything else.