Marx Was Right All Along

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
44
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#1
Marx Was Right All Along — "He Certainly Knew a Thing or Two About the Business Cycle"
Mar 4, 2009
By Peter Taaffe




"As capitalism stares into the abyss, was Marx right all along?" This is not from The Socialist but from Stephen King, HSBC Banking Group's Chief Economist, writing in The Independent (March 2). Moreover, he answers his own question in the affirmative.

Any bosses and their political hangers-on who read The Independent must have been choking on their breakfast cereal as he recalled Marx's words in the Communist Manifesto: "Modern bourgeois society ... a society that has conjured up such gigantic means of production and of exchange, is like the sorcerer who is no longer able to control the powers of the nether world whom he has called up by his spells."

King concludes from this: "Whatever else one thinks of Marx, he certainly knew a thing or two about the business cycle. Were he alive now, he would surely claim his theories were being vindicated."

Yet, "For many years, Marxist ideas appeared to be totally irrelevant. The collapse of the Berlin Wall in 1989 brought to an end the era of Marxist-Leninist Communism." But now, as the system collapses, Marx's ideas have come roaring back.

He approvingly quotes Marx on the nature of crises: ".....the commercial crises... by their periodical return, put the existence of the entire bourgeois society on its trial, each time more threateningly.

"In these crises, a great part, not only of the existing products, but also of the previously created productive forces, is periodically destroyed. In these crises, there breaks out an epidemic that, in all earlier epochs, would have seemed an absurdity - the epidemic of over-production."

This apt description of the present capitalist crisis, which threatens to topple over into a depression, does not escape King. Faced with this 'abyss', he points to the inevitable intervention of the capitalist state in an attempt to save the system. This will take the form not just of state takeovers, openly or by stealth, of the banks and maybe other failing industries but also the "interference in the price mechanism" witnessed by the attacks on the bankers' pensions, says King.

These measures "may be absolutely necessary to prevent an outright collapse in global economic activity [but]... there will be no return to 'business as usual' for market forces." This confirms what The Socialist has argued since the beginning of this crisis.

As to the future: "We may avoid a 1930s Depression but, increasingly, we may find the best we can hope for is a 1990s Japan. Not quite a Marxist revolution, then, but certainly a lasting sea-change in economic performance."

This is for him a necessary qualification. King is not about to accept the full implication of the ideas of Marx: "I'm not suggesting we're entering revolutionary times." [God forbid! - PT] This crisis is so serious that Marx's broad economic analysis is confirmed in the daily avalanche of facts which denote that British and world capitalism is 'falling off the cliff'.

Moreover, there has been a huge radicalization in Greece and elsewhere, and in time revolutionary storms will result from this crisis. As King testifies, even capitalist economists are now seriously questioning the future of their system.

They still hope that 'somehow' they will be able to escape from this crisis. There is no 'final crisis of capitalism', as Lenin pointed out, unless the working class changes society. Big business will always seek a way out through attacks on the working class.

But there is no going back to the situation of the last 30 years of worldwide capitalist 'deregulation'. The working class, assisted by socialists and Marxists and a revitalized labor movement, will resist and Marx's ideas will be embraced by increasing numbers of workers and young people.

Marx did not just make economic predictions about capitalism but drew bold, active, socialist conclusions. "Philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world; the point is to change it." Mass working-class action is necessary to replace an outmoded, inefficient and wasteful system, capitalism, with a democratic, socialist planned economy.

By full involvement of working and middle class people through popular control and management of industry and society, we can begin the organization and planning of the resources of society for all and not, as is the case now, to satisfy the discredited handful of greedy bankers and capitalists.

Stephen King has provided us with further ammunition to achieve this.

http://www.socialistalternative.org/news/article20.php?id=1036
 
Apr 4, 2006
1,719
333
83
44
www.myspace.com
#3
Marxism will never be right as well as any form of socialism or communism.

I dont think that people fully understand any of it, using Karl Marx's ideologies this very message board we use to exchange ideals wouldnt exist because its a source of alternate ideals that is dangerous to the socialist-marxist ideology.
 
Apr 25, 2002
10,848
198
0
39
#4
the epidemic of over production. society suddenly finds itself back into a state of monetary barbarism; it appears as if famine, a universal war of devastation had cut off the supple of every means of subsistence; industry and commerce seems to be destroyed ; and why? too much means of subsistence , too much commerce, too much industry. the production forces at the disposal of society no long tend to further the development of the conditions of bourgeois property; on the contrary , they have become too powerful for those conditions, by which the fretted, and so soon as they over come these fetters, they they bring disorder into the whole bourgeois society , endanger the existence of bourgeois property. the conditions of bourgeois society are too narrow to compromise the wealth created by them. and how does the bourgeois over come these crises ? on one hand by the enforced destruction of a mass productive forces; on the other , by the conquest of new markets, and thorough exploitation of old ones.

- karl marx
 
Apr 4, 2006
1,719
333
83
44
www.myspace.com
#5
the epidemic of over production. society suddenly finds itself back into a state of monetary barbarism; it appears as if famine, a universal war of devastation had cut off the supple of every means of subsistence; industry and commerce seems to be destroyed ; and why? too much means of subsistence , too much commerce, too much industry. the production forces at the disposal of society no long tend to further the development of the conditions of bourgeois property; on the contrary , they have become too powerful for those conditions, by which the fretted, and so soon as they over come these fetters, they they bring disorder into the whole bourgeois society , endanger the existence of bourgeois property. the conditions of bourgeois society are too narrow to compromise the wealth created by them. and how does the bourgeois over come these crises ? on one hand by the enforced destruction of a mass productive forces; on the other , by the conquest of new markets, and b thorough exploitation of old ones.

- karl marx
Karl Marx's ideologies were at best delusional..

bourgeois = entitlement/government ownership.
 
Jul 10, 2002
2,180
18
0
45
#6
Socialism is Good
Communism is nice in theory, not attainable and bad in real world.
Capitalism is a great economic system, but terrible for political structure
Democracy, great political system, terrible when corrupted by absolute capital interest.
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
44
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#9
Marxism will never be right as well as any form of socialism or communism.

I dont think that people fully understand any of it, using Karl Marx's ideologies this very message board we use to exchange ideals wouldnt exist because its a source of alternate ideals that is dangerous to the socialist-marxist ideology.
Do you know a single thing about Marxism or are you simply making shit up on the spot? Serious question. Or do you confuse Marxim with Stalin's totalitarian USSR, etc.?
 

ThaG

Sicc OG
Jun 30, 2005
9,597
1,687
113
#10
You can't blame Capitalism for this mess.

The Government created this mess, not Capitalism.
Really?

So the relentless pursuit of profits and the deregulation of the "free market" imposed by neoclassical economic orthodoxy has nothing to do with the current crisis?
 

ThaG

Sicc OG
Jun 30, 2005
9,597
1,687
113
#11
Marxism will never be right as well as any form of socialism or communism.

I dont think that people fully understand any of it, using Karl Marx's ideologies this very message board we use to exchange ideals wouldnt exist because its a source of alternate ideals that is dangerous to the socialist-marxist ideology.
You are confusing Marxism with Totalitarianism. The former does not necessitate the latter.

The truth is that ideas of Marxism/communism are very beautiful and appealing and there is a very good reason why the most progressive young people in the end of the 19th and beginning of 20th century embraced them so readily. This a detail that's conveniently left out when the history of communism is told in the West, but before there was the USSR that communism embodied the dreams of millions of people all over Europe.

The problem with the otherwise very beautiful idea that we should stop being focused on our well being with no regard for the greater societal good and create a more just society is that it is impossible to make it happen in practice, because of the basic bio-behavioral characteristics of the human species.

In theory communism is a very good thing and probably the best societal system ever designed, the problem is that people who had to implement is weren't up to the task, that's why it ended up such a disaster. Still, had it not been for the presence of a competing system actively trying to undermine it, there would have been much less repression because the official reason for it would not have existed.

And had it not been forced to compete with that other system, i.e. it was implemented worldwide it would still be around and the world would probably be in a much better shape right now.

BTW I have stated in other threads that there is no way you can have a stable "democracy" in its present form, again because of the bio-behavioral characteristics of the human species. The only viable form of societal organization in which the world as we know it can continue to exist is a totalitarian one, but not designed to repress people, but to have the educated people keeping the stupid ones from destroying it. I.e. we don't take decisions about serious issues country by country, but worldwide, and we don't take them based on irrelevant to the real world concepts such as human rights and free market and democratic principles, but based on hardcore rational analysis of the situation.

That means that a worldwide totalitarian regime would be much better equipped to cope with the challenges we face today. The greatest irony in human history will be the fact that in the end of the 20th century we celebrated the fact that we got rid of almost all totalitarian regimes, while in the 21st century it will be the democracy we so revere so much that will bring us the biggest nightmare we have ever seen in our history...
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
44
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#14
In theory communism is a very good thing and probably the best societal system ever designed, the problem is that people who had to implement is weren't up to the task, that's why it ended up such a disaster.
It could be said that it was implemented in the wrong way, or perhaps wrong places. Karl Marx said communism would first come out of an advanced Capitalist country, such as the US, after capitalism uses up it's useful purpose. There is an arguement Communism was doomed to fail because it was implemented first in a backwards country.

I completely disagree when you say it's "impossible to make it happen in practice," I think it's the inevitable as we advance.
 
Nov 24, 2003
6,307
3,639
113
#15
it is impossible to make it happen in practice, because of the basic bio-behavioral characteristics of the human species


Most insightful point in this thread.

Humans are designed to be altruistic only when the benefits to them can be directly realized.
 
Nov 24, 2003
6,307
3,639
113
#16
So global capitalism has been not been a failure?


Absolutely not.

It cannot fail by design because capitalism itself has no goals, and therefore cannot fail. Capitalism is merely a social technology designed to organize human economic interactions in a particular way. People can fail, capitalism cannot.

How do you suppose it has failed?

The economy runs on a boom - bust cycle. We are now experiencing the downside of the current economic cycle. It sounds to me like things are going exactly according to the plan of anyone who understands macro-economics.
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
44
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#18
Absolutely not.

It cannot fail by design because capitalism itself has no goals, and therefore cannot fail. Capitalism is merely a social technology designed to organize human economic interactions in a particular way. People can fail, capitalism cannot.

How do you suppose it has failed?
Oh gee, let's see here, well we can start with over half the planet's population living in poverty perhaps? It's failure to provide the vast majority of humanity with the material means for a dignified existence? The basic point that only a few countries have benefited from capitalism while the rest of the planet has suffered from their exploitations. The world's top 100 biggest companies now control 70% of the world's trade (even hardcore capitalists agree that is a bad thing, but like Marx said so many years ago, it was inevitable!). How about the utter destruction and disregard of the environment? Capitalism in general cannot survive much longer and will fail completely, yes there are cycles, Karl Marx said that in the 1800's, and it is condemned to repeat depressions, but still it cannot last forever. You're living in denial if you do not accept this reality.
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
44
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#20
Failure comes in from the people that can't manage a company or put faith in a commitment, capitalism has its faults, doesnt mean it fails.

The US government, the Federal Reserve.
But how can capitalism even survive in the US at this point, this is simply the governments fault? LOL, they are the ones that are keeping it alive! The only reason it still exists to support this way of living is through Imperialism, i.e america can only survive by exploiting other countries at this point. US Capitalism has been in decay for years. This is why we invade Iraq or overthrow democracies in 3rd world countries and install puppet regimes to exploit their natural resources.