Capitalism is dead

[nadinbrzezinski]

How dare I write this? Well the evidence is all over the place.

Let's go through the most glaring ones shall we?

Adam Smith was all against Monopolies, care to tell me when was the last time the Sherman Anti Trust Act was used? There you go. There is more, what Smith said was wrong with monopolies is exactly what is wrong with monopolies. We have extremely large corporations with more economic power than nation states. Tell me exactly how do you get competition in that environment? The short answer is, you don't. Nor do you get national entities (which are becoming brands) telling corporations what to do.

In the world of Adam Smith the economic order came right under morals, jurisprudence and a method. In English the economic order was subservient to the other things, which by the way emanated from God, a watchmaker. Ok ignore the god part here, but this order of things has been completely turned on it's head, and both morality and jurisprudence are currently subservient to the economic order and making a buck.

The world when Adam Smith wrote his Wealth, there was this emphasis on class. That is gone from the US, where all that matters is the individual and getting ahead. You doubt your lying eyes? When exactly is that famous class identity? It is gone, been gone for at least a generation... and it went away while consumption became the new god.

So what do we have exactly? What we have is a command economy that does not produce a thing, just distributes things that you think you need, and that has been globalized. But it is time to wake and smell the roses. We live in a post nation-state world, a post capitalist world, and very much a corporatist world. This is what is emerging. And they will keep telling you that this is capitalism, because it is far better sounding to your propaganda trained ears than the reality. And the reality is fascism, the classic definition of it... you see no need for jackboots either.

So time for all of you to wake up. And if you want to know how this future (and present) world might look like, I recommend you read some cyberpunk, especially Gibson... then wake up and start organizing. We MIGHT still have time, but time is short, very short indeed.

[Oregone]

1. As long as the means of production are privately owned, and wealth created during production is...

distributed disproportionally to those owners, capitalism is alive and well.

Despite what Adam Smith may or may not have favored, he advocated a system that essentially rewards capital over labor, and thereby, contributes to disparity (and eventual monopolies). All that is truly needed to keep capitalism alive is profiting private shareholders, and as far as I can tell, there are plenty of those.

[Larkspur]

2. Actually, we're living under corporate feudalism

That's what we get when monopolies rule the roost.

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. Very technically... fascism

or to use a nicer term, corporatism...

In the end it don't matter to the working people. We are still under same boots.

[Oregone]

6. If only corporatism and fascism were the same thing

I'm sure you have some fake Mussolini quotes to prove it though

[Oregone]

5. Blah, its a beautiful capitalistic butterfly that peeled away from its confining cocoon

It still has the same DNA. Why apologize for a system that is flawed in theory and manifests into shit? Sure, it looks pretty on paper. It looks pretty until disparity is pushed to the brink, through its very own fundamental mechanisms.

[fascisthunter]

7. it's fascism

they have the power of gov on their side enabling today's corporate behavior.

[Oregone]

10. Why would a fascist government exist to benefit private corporations?

In fascism, all other entities exist to edify the state, and only the state. The state will only intervene as long is its in their interests (to further benefit the state). All entities in fascism are secondary to the central authority.

The corporate State considers that private enterprise in the sphere of production is the most effective and usefu {sic} instrument in the interest of the nation. In view of the fact that private organisation of production is a function of national concern, the organiser of the enterprise is responsible to the State for the direction given to production.

State intervention in economic production arises only when private initiative is lacking or insufficient, or when the political interests of the State are involved. This intervention may take the form of control, assistance or direct management. —Benito Mussolini, 1935, "Fascism: Doctrine and Institutions", Rome: 'Ardita' Publishers.

Lets just call a spade a spade to have a real debate on economics. Invoking the Nazis to make a point is a tad heavy handed and probably not constructive. In fascism, the state will take from corporations to benefit their interests, and direct them according to the wishes of the state. In corporatism, the corporations will force the state to give to them (or create friendly policy) to benefit the corporations and shareholders alone. Are there simularities? Yes. Are there differences? Damn right. So lets not further blur the lines and obfuscate the issues, completely confusing the onlookers. Corporatism is today's enemy, which is just another flavor of Capitalism when the few amass enough power to influence government.

[RaleighNCDUer]

17. That is not true. Just look at Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy and

Fascist Spain. The state functioned to promote the power of the corporate elites, who held the offices of the state in order to facilitate that function. Soviet Russia was much more an example of what you describe as 'fascism'.

You want real fascism? Military Industrial Complex.

We've been a fascist state since the 50s.

[nadinbrzezinski]

19. Seems ignored has a lack of knoweldge

of basic political science terms.

Let me add that people have the terms muddled in their brains, and that is a function of heavy propaganda. Most people know of the secret police, but they seldom realize just how much in bed oh I don't know IG Farben was with the German state.

[Oregone]

27. Lack of knowledge? You are equating a complete political philosophy to an economic system...

Just to invoke images of nasty, mean "Nazis". This is absurdity. I see more intelligence when kiddies throw poop at eachother in the sandbox.

[Echo In Light]

22. +1

[Oregone]

25. What you are describing is an exploitation of the ideas of fascism to enable corporatism

It doesn't make them one in the same. All economic systems can be abused to promote the interests of the rich, just as fascism, capitalism and communism have illustrated.

Fascism sucks too. Its just not the same thing. If the state is "promot{ing} the power of the corporate elites", then that state is just pretending to be economically fascist (and otherwise). It is a direct contradiction of the fascists ideology, and it just mucks up this general argument.

Now, there are definitely fascists elements in America right now. I will not deny that. But by no means does "fascism" remotely describe the current economic system, whatsoever. Its foolish, and even bordering on childish to invoke this term. Its just corporatism enabled directly by decades of capitalism. Its the inevitable result of capitalism. To debate that we need to go back to the good ol capitalistic days is just to debate that we need to start back down the path here. We need a real debate on capitalism...on what it becomes.

Criticizing what it becomes, while embracing what allows it, essentially leads you into circles of booming and busting and the subsequent pain (and exploitation) that will be associated with it.

[elleng]

3. May be dying, and taking everything along with it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. It's dead... been dead for a while

we moved back to the future, aka fascism oh about 25 years ago. In the US the last step was People's United... that was the capstone in the fascist take over of the country... economically we are not a capitalist country. and the new way, the third way is about exactly that. You may know them as neo liberals too.

[fascisthunter]

9. we sure don't have capitalism here anymore

although those who like the current system don't want to admit it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. It's the propaganda, it sounds much better than calling it what

it really is. Free trade, which is not, sounds much better than Neo-Fascism.

[fascisthunter]

12. true...

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. But it's almost impossible

to get the blinders off people.

That is what is so damn frustrating.

HOORAY FOR THE FREE MARKET... :sarcasm:

[fascisthunter]

18. too many benefit from the system and don't want to scarifice their comfortable life styles

their life styles, our demise.

[nadinbrzezinski]

23. That is true

look at the mess in the gulf. As much as I am not going to jump into the GULF IS DEAD mentality (there is science here you know, and yes oil is bio degradable)... if that mess is not enough to I don't know encourage people to change life styles and governments to take policy actions... well then... our goose is cooked.

This is far more of a brainiac exercise anyway... and it takes a lot of readying.

[Oregone]

13. The way I see it, people who don't call this {late stage} capitalism are Capitalist Apologists

LEAVE CAPITALISM ALONE!!!1!!!

[fascisthunter]

20. lol

good lawd... I remember that video circulating the internet.

[gulliver]

15. Not yet, but the Republicans are working toward that.

Capitalism is being ruined by its worshipers. They let it eat anything. They never tell it no. The Republicans love capitalism so much they turned it into a cross between Amy Winehouse and the plant from Little Shop of Horrors.

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. It is gone

the grunts, including many members of congress THINK that is what they are defending, but it is gone.

What's replaced the actual system is a religion. Ask a RWer, I've done this, to quote from the Wealth... and go beyond the Hand of the marketplace (named once in a 1200 page book with multiple caveats)... they can't.

Capitalism requires regulation, well paid labor, breaking up of monopolies, I could go on.

But if all you pay lip service to is a religious idea, and not the actual words, you'd never know that. And here is where propaganda comes into play...

[gulliver]

21. Well, it could come back.

I think Obama is getting it shored up quite a bit. Capitalism is definitely sick, but I don't think it is dead. Get the rules back into it and it can be a great game once again. Its decentralization should appeal to liberals, for one thing. It should not be allowed to run roughshod over the general welfare of humanity as the Republicans would have it. They think they are worshiping capitalism, but I think they are worshiping....Satan.

(apologies to Dana Carvey)

[nadinbrzezinski]

Well I will eat, gladly mind you, my hat

if Obama starts practicing some break them monopolies and enforcing anti trust regs and actually gets EFCA done...

I am not holding my breath on that.

[dem mba]

24. the end is nigh!1111!!!!!

good lord.

isn't it possible that the economy is simply CHANGING, not necessarily CRUMBLING? i grow weary of these types of posts that keep popping up on this forum.

you don't point to a single instance of a monopoly.

you talk of economic orders, like that means anything. you talk of class, like that means anything.

as for this command economy that produces things i think i need, its just utter bullshit. I have yet to buy a Snuggie, yet have seen hundreds of ads for it. Marketing efforts influence people who have a need. IF no need exists, they will not buy it. If they buy something and have no need for it, then they're dumb, and there's no cure for that.

[nadinbrzezinski]

26. Well, well when exactly did I say

the economy is crumbling? It is churning fine thank you, it is just not a capitalist system... and that is the point, open your eyes... or not.

As to monopolies... need I point some of the largest corporations in town? Oh wait, since K-Mart, Target and Wally World are around it means we don't have monopolies... :sarcasm:

Oh and you do not notice just how marketing influences your every day and shopping habits. So you do not buy a snuggie... there are plenty of other products you buy and you don't even realize it... it is called brand loyalty, and Barnays wasn't a fool either when he started the modern era of marketing.

Ed for spelling and clarity

[Oregone]

28. The Nazis are coming! The Nazis are coming!

[fascisthunter]

29. they are already here

America just labels them the extreme right wing and the KKK.

[Oregone]

30. Oh! Then run for the hills! Buy lots of Gold and Guns!

[fascisthunter]

32. I'm not scared, but I know what I see and read regardless of your attitude

now you can move on...

[Oregone]

33. Good to hear

Hope you can fight the good ol fight then to get your precious pure Adam Smith capitalism back then to solve the world's problem

Just how Woody would of wanted it

[laughingliberal]

31. K & R nt

[blindpig]

34. No, but it is dying.

Problem is that the death throes threaten to destroy all else with it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

35. Been dead for over a generation, at least

all that remains is for people to wake up, smell the roses and realize it.

What we have today is destructive, very destructive, but far away from it... and until people realize this, the propaganda will continue to work.

As they say...

Capitalism is dead, long live the propaganda that it still lives.


I recommend people READ the actual books...

[fishwax]

36. well, it's certainly changed, but it isn't dead

It's moved far away from Smith's descriptions, that's for sure.

[nadinbrzezinski]

39. It moved to Benito Mussolini's working definition

[Oregone]

53. Except it probably didn't....

http://www.publiceye.org/fascist/corporatism.html

Corporatism is not the exact same thing as fascism. Im sorry that you continually ignore this

[fishwax]

56. I think it's actually closer to what Mussolini called supercapitalism (which he opposed)

He believed that what he called supercapitalism (with its emphasis on increasing consumption and standardization) was the problem, and he saw fascism as the solution.

There are elements of fascism in play now, to be sure, but the canvas has changed, so only part of that old painting remains. The corporate capitalism we're dealing with now (in which corporate interests control not just the economy but the state) is something different from Mussolini's vision (in which the state controlled corporations and the economy).

[nadinbrzezinski]

57. The states and the corporations

were to work together to control the economy...

Here from his mouth... or typewriter...

"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini ...

When I look at US Economy it fits this, like a glove. And the Third Way has been trying to move in this direction for over two generations now. Here on the third way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way_%28centrism%29

Sorry about the Wiki link, but some of the PDFs I've read on this are damn right scary.

[fishwax]

64. actually, the states, corporations, and labor were to work together to control the economy

Labor doesn't seem to have a spot at the table in the beast we're dealing with now.

I've heard that Mussolini quote before, but fwiw Oregone's link suggests that it's specious: http://www.publiceye.org/fascist/corporatism.html

[nadinbrzezinski]

66. But I have read his hard to read rants

and the power given to labor was quite subservient to that of government and industry. Hitler took it to the next step and went after labor.

So did Franco by the way, and he went on until the 1970s.

And so did the Chile and Argentinian and Brazilian messes... and Mexico had a strong labor movement but fit the definition in the 1970s. As they say, fascism takes on local conditions.

[USArmyParatrooper]

37. Do you have an example of a non-Capitalist country

with a high quality of life?

[nadinbrzezinski]

38. Sweeeden and Norway

by definition they are not capitalist either. They are a HYBRID economy.

And you think this is a capitalist system, the propaganda works

[USArmyParatrooper]

42. They're Capitalist

The propaganda runs so deep it even invaded the dictionary.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Capitalism

An economic system based on a free market, open competition, profit motive and private ownership of the means of production. Capitalism encourages private investment and business, compared to a government-controlled economy. Investors in these private companies (i.e. shareholders) also own the firms and are known as capitalists.

[nadinbrzezinski]

44. No they are not

they are HYBRID economies, like the US was oh back in the 1950s.

They also are far more highly regulated than we are right now.

Oh and they keep money out of politics

Here is more the standard of living in the US is actually stagnant, if you are nice about it, if not out right falling.

[USArmyParatrooper]

47. It's highly regulated *Capitalism*

At their core is free trade between privately owned businesses, which define them as Capitalist. I don't disagree that we should have more government regulations and definitely have money taken out of politics. But having a different tweak of the same basic system does not make it a different system all together.

[nadinbrzezinski]

48. What we are living under is NO LONGER Capitalism

that *IS* the point. It stopped being this a long time ago. Oh a generation ago... the principles of free trade have been replaced by what is good for gargantuan corporations with the income of nation states, that CONTROL the state to further their means. THAT is the definition of Fascism, the textbook definition. People United just was the last step in this.

Oh and BOTH Sweden and Norway are SOCIAL DEMOCRACIES... you might want to study on that. They are not capitalist countries, they use elements of Capitalism, but are NOT capitalists... they are HYBRID.

[USArmyParatrooper]

51. A Social Democracy

Is a gradual transition toward Socialism, which I do not believe is the intended end state for the US, Sweden or Norway.

It's a hybrid between what and what?

[nadinbrzezinski]

52. For Sweeden and Norway

socialism might be the goal actually... we might go into fits, and become the exorcist... (though socialism is becoming the in thing among the youth in the US, not that they understand it either but that is another story) But in Europe they are not scared of it...

Now what is a mixed or hybrid economy? Here

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-hybrid-economy.htm

[USArmyParatrooper]

59. I think we're only disagreeing on

definitions, but not principle. I think Socialism is a horrible system, but I do favor the system of say, Sweden.

I also disagree about whether or not Socialism is their intended end state. I think the owner of Ikea might have something to say about that.

[nadinbrzezinski]

61. And why do you think that?

Don't tell me the USSR, it was as socialist as the US is Capitalist.

I suspect one reason you distrust it is quite frankly propaganda. We've been at war with "socialism" since oh the 1830s, well before Marx put pen to paper. Fournier was hot back then.

And it is time that we the people give a fair hearing to all political and economic theories, which incidentally includes actual Capitalism... and also incidentally Marx is considered the last of the Classic Economists, the first is Smith... that should give you some food for thought.

Oh and I will say this... about these two "fighting systems" they are both Utopian... and the best we can do, is what we've done in the past, a HYBRID system with a STRONG union movement, a STRONG social network and HIGHLY REGULATED private sector. Yes that was the US in the 1950s... I'd like to make the social net much stronger, and the taxation is about right... 90% for top earners. And I'd like to expand the rights of labor to actually sit at management boards... which we IMPOSED on Germany at the end of the war.

But I also recognize that we do not live in a capitalist system and that indeed living standards in this country are not just going down, will plummet. And the first step is to call this what it is... and capitalism is not.

[USArmyParatrooper]

65. Let me clarify

What you describe as ideal I am in full agreement on. I'm just asserting that at it's core it's still a Capitalist system.

As to why not Socialism, I have yet to see a successful application of such a system (one that didn't suck).

[nadinbrzezinski]

67. The problem is that it is not

Social Democracies use some ASPECTS of both systems... in small merchant to merchant they use capitalism, the social net and government regulation is FULLY socialist. No, not communist, socialist... So there is your example of successfully deployed.

I have my doubts that it could go much beyond that size of a society of that size and that particular history, but that is another discussion. You asked for a place where it works, both Sweden and Norway function very well, thank you very much.

[USArmyParatrooper]

69. Government regulation =/= Socialism

In Socialism the government (and thus the people) have full ownership of the means of production and distribution. Regulation is something imposed on a third party, in this case the private owners.

You're not willing to call Sweden's system Capitalism, but you're willing to call it Socialism? Who owns Ikea?

[nadinbrzezinski]

70. You really do not get how regulated they are

nor do you get it how the nature of their SOCIAL NET function... why it is called HYBRID. NOT CAPITALIST.

I could say the core of the economy is the highly government run medical system, road system, school system. all the way to PhD by the way... that is GOVERNMENT RUN, not PRIVATE SECTOR, GOVERNMENT.

Now here is a hint of how this works, the owner of Ikea does not make infinite amounts of money from his base worker. Just how much he makes is MANDATED by the state. By the way there are oodles of papers on whether this encourages performance or not, but that is another matter.

Go and read the link I gave you, or not... don't matter. But they are not a capitalist country, they are a social democracy. And if you cannot get the difference, I can't help you. Use the google.

[USArmyParatrooper]

72. I asked you for a successful application of Socialism

and you gave me Sweden. So are we both in agreement that Sweden is not an example of Socialism?

As far as privatized schools and medical industry, that is a fair point. The medical industry alone would count for a small, but meaningful portion of their overall economy.

But their government regulating the owner of Ikea's sallary?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingvar_Kamprad

It seems the government of Sweden felt he should be limited to be the 11th richest man in the world... out of 6.7 Billion people.

[nadinbrzezinski]

73. It is... but to each his own

it is a HYBRID system... whatever.

HOORAY FOR CAPITALISM. CAPITALISM IS KING. CAPITALISM IS DEAD!!! BUT HOOORAY FOR CAPITALISM, best system evah! Where exactly have I heard that? Oh yes propaganda tracts, even when the evidence is not exactly bearing that out.

And yes so is the owner of volvo... by the way.

Oh and here is one of the oodles of paper

http://www.essays.se/essay/f3372b36ef/

I can play the google game too

[jotsy]

75. Curious

The definition offered by Webster's College dictionary from 2001 doesn't quite read the same way.

It reads:

an economic systems in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations.

The two statements certainly vary in meaning for me.

[Oregone]

54. The US has a mixed economy too

Most of the western countries do to some degree

[fascisthunter]

40. Yes... the USA

this isn't capitalism.... most sensible countries have a hybrid system, not as narrowly defined as our own and much more socialized.

[USArmyParatrooper]

43. It's not *pure* Capitalism, sure

If that's the bar set for the OP Capitalism was dead a long time ago.

[nadinbrzezinski]

45. By Reagan's time

about a generation ago.

We WERE a hybrid economy with a safety net... we have moved into something ELSE... and it is not currently Capitalism, It had a lot more in common with Corporatism. Google up the definition.

[Oregone]

55. If thats the bar, it never existed

This OP is full of confusion and hyperbole, used primarily to defend and apologize for Capitalism

[donco6]

41. I thought "corporatist" was on the list of no-no words.

No?

[nadinbrzezinski]

46. Not in my dictionary of Political Science terms

:hi:

And the DLCers are, with most Republicans. They just don't realize it.

[donco6]

49. I wonder if they ever will?

Good article.

[nadinbrzezinski]

50. If the past is prologue

they will five seconds after they realize they are now at the bottom and their lives are going to hell. Then again there are people still alive today who were alive back then that believe no mistakes were made.

[WinkyDink]

58. The problem is : FEUDALISM IS BACK.

[nadinbrzezinski]

63. Fascism

When oh Exxon gets it's Knights Errant... then you will be able to talk me into the feudalism aspect.

[kgnu_fan]

60. I think we need "morality" in economic system and "god" has died

as a true guiding light (with horrible Vatican politics and their moral decay), consumption oriented cultures went down the hill in term of ethics. With unrepentant greed and avarice taking down the whole world with it, this version of economic system called "capitalism" ceased to serve humanity. I think we need to re-invent an economic system with higher moral and ethical inspiration from scratch. Or re-engineer the previously dismissed form of economic experimentation, innovation and inspiration into something that will serve humanity for peaceful future. We need to use our "smarts".

[nadinbrzezinski]

62. A hybrid economic system

actually might fit that bill...

As to god is dead... not to all, and Smith's god was nothing like the god of the Vatican. Smith was a Deist, like oh Jefferson... and they'd rather keep god safely in the church. But all did come from God, it was an epistemological view of the world. A system of thought.

Granted, the first step it to realize what is broken before we can fix it... and for that we need a method to the madness.

[kgnu_fan]

68. Concept of "God" is helpful if people actually live by "the teaching"

of Good, Beauty and Harmony.... like Jesus did...

Whatever makes people care of our human brothers and sisters, then it is helpful and welcomed.

[nadinbrzezinski]

71. As I said, for both Smith and Jefferson

god was a distant watchmaker... not getting involved in human life.

Hell for Jefferson the bible was a book full of nice stories, that could do with a few less miracles. See Jefferson bible...

[kgnu_fan]

74. Whatever works for people to be good. If someone needs a god who

is involved with their inner life, I do not deny such relationship. Some people need a distant watcher in order to grow in their moral life, so be it. That is why separation of Church and State is important.