General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNaomi Klein is right: Unchecked capitalism will destroy civilization
via Grist:
Naomi Klein is right: Unchecked capitalism will destroy civilization
By Joseph Romm
Cross-posted from Climate Progress
19 Sep 2014 10:44 AM
Best-selling progressive journalist Naomi Klein has an important new book out, This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate. The author of No Logo and The Shock Doctrine now tackles the most profound threat humanity has ever faced: the war our economic model is waging against life on earth, as the book jacket aptly puts it.
In diagnosing the unprecedented existential threat humanity faces thanks to our myopia and unbridled greed, Klein has three essential points to make:
1. Because we have ignored the increasingly urgent warnings and pleas for action from climate scientists for a quarter century (!) now, the incremental or evolutionary paths to avert catastrophic global warming that we might have been able to take in the past are closed to us.
2. Humanity faces a stark choice as a result: the end of civilization as we know it or the end of capitalism as we know it.
3. Choosing unregulated capitalism over human civilization would be a morally monstrous choice and so the winning message for the climate movement is a moral one.
As an aside, readers may remember that I dont always agree with Klein on either substance or messaging. And obviously I have quibbles with her book in particular I am skeptical of some elements of her proposed cure (and how she frames them) as Ill discuss in a later post. But in fairness to Klein, our 25-year dawdling has made the diagnosis (and prognosis) unimaginably graver and thus made all cures look politically implausible, as the pessimistic, do-little eco-modernists keep pointing out far too gleefully.
To anyone who thinks attacking unchecked capitalism is not a winning message (when done correctly), Id urge you to read the advice of Frank Luntz, the GOPs top messaging guru, on the subject: dont say capitalism because Americans think capitalism is immoral.
The great value in the book lies in Kleins understanding and elaboration of the three essential points above. Indeed Im not certain any other book has so clearly spelled out these points. And yet these three points are, arguably, the most important ones for climate hawks, for the (misnamed) intelligentsia, and, indeed, for all homo sapiens to understand at a deep level, since they clarify the choices we now must make. .................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://grist.org/climate-energy/naomi-klein-is-right-unchecked-capitalism-will-destroy-civilization/
merrily
(45,251 posts)And damned close on a big bunch of other things?
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)jwirr
(39,215 posts)look at the islands in the ocean and maybe the ocean itself. Not to mention Africa.
mb999
(89 posts)The workers at the bottom support the few moocher billionaire oligarchs at the top. The end result is slavery. Capitalism needs to be heavily regulated so the workers can share in the prosperity they create until it can be replaced with a less barbaric system.
alterfurz
(2,474 posts)...only more so.
mountain grammy
(26,648 posts)blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)If we let them, they will destroy the world economy.
We have one huge glaring historical example of laissez faire, hands off, free market capitalism. It did not go well.
RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)No one can say we didn't see it coming.
ladjf
(17,320 posts)TBF
(32,090 posts)Fixed it for you. Solution: socialism.
young_at_heart
(3,772 posts)"Without general elections, without freedom of the press, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, without the free battle of opinions, life in every public institution withers away, becomes a caricature of itself, and bureaucracy rises as the only deciding factor."
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)TBF
(32,090 posts)I'm correct - even if people prefer to bury their heads in the sand.
young_at_heart
(3,772 posts)Capitalism was unchecked while the Republicans were in power (Harding, Hoover) and the country was brought to its knees. There were many "Hooverville's" around the country.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)whose most famous quote while President was "The business of America is business".
daleanime
(17,796 posts)And the reading list grows longer.
Maynar
(769 posts)[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Unfortunately, her San Francisco Bay Area appearance is sold out.
FrodosPet
(5,169 posts)What exactly is the funding mechanism? Is it the universe's first perpetual motion machine - capable of sustaining purely on its own output?
What provides the incentives to get up and go to work? Will people who get off their butts still be able to get nicer stuff than people who don't? Will slackers be imprisoned for attacking the social order if they are lazy?
What is the mechanism for economic growth? Will there still be free enterprise occupations and business, or is everything completely state owned? If the local development council consists primarily of corrupt dimwits, will there be ways around them?
Uh oh... I just realized, I am not properly worshipping socialism here - red baiting alert!
leftstreet
(36,112 posts)If you eliminated the elite profit-takers from our midst, people would still labor. They would teach school, fix teeth, pour concrete, bake cookies, design software, build bridges, clean motel rooms, assemble cars, litigate court cases, and lay carpets.
The only difference is they wouldn't be kicking up the profits from those labors to someone else.
How hard is that to understand?
FrodosPet
(5,169 posts)...where does the start-up capital come from?
Where does the cement pourer get his cement? Where does the dentist get his chair, drill, and x-ray machine?
Without non-governmental economic activity, where does the state road commission get the money to buy the steel for the bridges?
leftstreet
(36,112 posts)FrodosPet
(5,169 posts)That shows that SOME capitalists are arrogant vest wearing cigar smoking putzes. Not all, but some.
However, this was not what I asked though. I am asking, "Where does the initial money come from to start an enterprise, such as a manufacturer of goods, or a store, etc, in a socialist system?"
Why does everyone just default to the "fuck the rich assholes" meme and then avoid elaboration whenever I ask a detail oriented question?
leftstreet
(36,112 posts)socialist_n_TN
(11,481 posts)Why do you expect people to put together an entire people based system in an internet post? I've got my ideas about the shape of a socialist system as do a lot of others, but the details are worked out by the people and not some "private property" owner.
My idea of where the money would come from for start ups? I can answer that one. It would come from the banks that have been expropriated from the wealthy and nationalized under worker and citizen's control. In addition, the means of production (factories, farms, transportation and distribution) for the commanding heights of the economy would be expropriated and run under workers and citizen's control for the benefit of ALL, not the few profit takers. Eventually, the necessities of life would be planned for without thought for someone's profit only for everyone's needs.
rogerashton
(3,920 posts)Just one person's thinking, you understand.
ReRe
(10,597 posts)Unregulated Capitalism = Fascism + No Democracy.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)Don't worry about us. It's the 1% who will perish of idleness.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)No one will do anything and all the hard working people will get screwed!!!!!!!!! Oh noes! Let's spread more RW propaganda and see if it goes away.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Why don't you present an actual argument instead of making insinuations via questions?
If you don't think socialism will work, then what do you recommend?
FrodosPet
(5,169 posts)Retention of a profit motive and distributed responsibility, with a crackdown on fraud and monopolies. Incentivize worker owned enterprises, get more people to have a stake and a reward in success. Taxed at a Goldilocks rate that provides for infrastructure maintenance and improvement and compassion for the infirmed and the elderly, but not so high that it removes incentive and resources for growth and rainy day survival. And more economic education and small business incubators in impoverished areas.
Socialism seems like another monopoly. Supposedly run "For The People", but only a small number of individuals will stand up and assume authority as representatives of the masses. And it would be backed by the governmental powers of confiscation and incarceration.
marym625
(17,997 posts)tooeyeten
(1,074 posts)Add a environmental crisis, climate change, we are doomed.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)leftstreet
(36,112 posts)nt
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)socialist_n_TN
(11,481 posts)Skidmore
(37,364 posts)giving people permission to indulge the greed within them does not lead to healthy communities. When you stop expecting that people treat each other with decency and respect to have more, you end up with cutthroats in power.
Louisiana1976
(3,962 posts)FrodosPet
(5,169 posts)Which flavor of socialism will save us? Anarchy or central planned? Worker co-ops or state-owned? What levels of government will own what enterprises? Will my local beer store be owned by the city, county, state, or federal government?
Will there still be microbrews, competing through quality, or just a generic "Volksbiere"?
How do you prevent a black market? Will we have to train the children to turn in their parents for illegal sales of toilet paper and toothbrushes? Will the government have to step up law enforcement to attack private commercial transactions and bartering?
Why won't anyone explain these things? All I hear is "Socialism rocks because fuck rich people!", but the supporters I try to engage never get into details, just hazy predictions about how we, unlike every other nation that has tried and failed, will succeed.
eShirl
(18,503 posts)former9thward
(32,077 posts)Yet in this thread almost everyone professes some form of socialism or Marxism. The Democratic party has always been a capitalist party and always will be. I know a lot of Democratic activists in my city/state and none are socialists. Are people parked in the Democratic party while waiting for a "real" party to come along? Or do people actually think they are going to convert the Democratic party into a socialist party?
sadoldgirl
(3,431 posts)of a socialist democracy. It seems to work in scandinavian countries quite well. Why not give it a try here, unless you believe the present system is the one that makes us exceptional?
former9thward
(32,077 posts)Every single one of them. No, not the type of capitalism as the U.S. but capitalist nevertheless. The posters in the thread by their own words are not capitalist in the least.
socialist_n_TN
(11,481 posts)although people who trumpet this site as for "Democrats Only" always forget the second part of the purpose statement which is "and other progressives".
I've had an open agenda since I've been posting on DU of converting left leaning Democrats to Marxism because left leaning people, most of whom don't know of any other option to capitalism than the bastardized version of the USSR under Stalinism, are the ones who are closest to already BEING Marxist. And a lot of people, especially on a left leaning site like DU, are already more socialist than capitalist, they either just don't know it or don't want to admit it. I want to give those folks the socialist option to choose if they think it fits their world view.
But I do agree with you that the Democratic Party has always been and always will be a capitalist party. The only time the Dems came close to being a party for workers was when they were needed as a capitalist counterweight for the real workers' parties that sprang up during the last big crisis of capitalism, the Great Depression. They were the ones that gave the workers a few more crumbs from the owners' tables to prevent socialism from becoming established in the USA. Since the fall of the USSR there's no need for that counterweight, so the Dems have dropped support for any policies that help workers rather than the owners and have become what, as you said, they always were, a capitalist party.
Ultimately, class struggle is a zero-sum game. If the owners win, the workers lose and vice versa. During times of crisis, a capitalist party will support the owners in whatever way is needed. At one time when there was a real alternative, the capitalist Dems, threw a little more support to workers. Apparently the newer version of the Democratic Party doesn't think there's a need for that support of workers anymore.
former9thward
(32,077 posts)Not the USA CP type of communist but a Maoist. I no longer am. I believe capitalism is the best way of bringing an increased standard of living to the most people. It has problems, such as income inequality, but I think that human nature conflicts with socialism to the point it can't work.
socialist_n_TN
(11,481 posts)But I have been a Trotskyist since my youth and I've held on to it. Although that was difficult for a few decades when Keynesian economics seemed to have found a way to defuse the class war. Intellectually I could see that it was only a capitalist tactic in fighting the Cold War, but it was difficult to argue with UNTIL the Reagan/Thatcher Axis of Evil dismantled the Keynesian economic idea and then the fall of the USSR took the brakes off of capitalism entirely. Or almost entirely.
Et voila! Marx was demonstrably correct once again just like he was when he and Engels' first started writing. Which means that every time capitalism is allowed to be itself, it becomes the rapacious animal it actually IS. This is the third time that capitalism has slipped regulatory bounds and become a threat to democracy. I don't want my grandchildren to be constantly fighting fascism like I've had to do. Ergo, we need to try something different like a work's council democracy.
Trotsky, the Marxist road not taken.
TBF
(32,090 posts)but events will dictate when that changes. Socialists will be ready when that time comes.
And, frankly, if you hope to save capitalism you'd better get your ass in gear because the income inequality charts are showing a bigger gap than ever between the few "haves" and the many "have nots". ie - there are many more of us than there are of you and when the masses at large realize that it's game over for capitalism.
former9thward
(32,077 posts)No, there are many more of us than there are of you, is just plain false in this country. Socialists are the tiniest of minorities in this country. But good luck, you may get what you want in 100, 200 or 300 years.
TBF
(32,090 posts)how much more do you think folks can take? The gini coefficient continues to show growing inequality when comparing countries. There we are down there with Mexico:
sadoldgirl
(3,431 posts)children and adults that greed is bad and leading to disasters. The ME,ME society has to be replaced by a WE society, since in the end we are all in this mess together, and what we do to others should be done to us as well.
The realization of the desperate need for communal thinking has to come before any action could be started even.
The2ndWheel
(7,947 posts)Think of civilization as a corporation, and the planet as the government. Think what human beings can't actually do physically. All of the progress we've made over the centuries is like finding loopholes in government regulation. We don't like limits. Human flight. Humans traveling at 50mph. Name the advance, and it's no different than what Monsanto, Wal-Mart, or Exxon do in relation to the government. Humans now try to write the environmental rules that govern us.
Civilization is what is unchecked. It is why we're at where we're at.
Mnemosyne
(21,363 posts)LuvNewcastle
(16,856 posts)I believe socialism, or hybrid systems, are the wave of the future. Unfortunately, it also seems that fascism and totalitarianism are also on the rise, remarkably so in this country. We have to do all we can to stop that. I don't think it's possible to have socialism without a large degree of government oversight, but the tactics of our intelligence agencies, the DEA, and the police are way beyond what is required to provide proper oversight. We have to stop it for our descendants as well as for ourselves.
bhikkhu
(10,724 posts)Capitalism, by nature, funnels all the wealth into the top tier and keeps it there. Government, through taxation, regulation, social programs and so forth, maintains whatever standard of equity people demand.
Most of the arguments against capitalism are really arguments for more effective and responsive government.
DemocraticWing
(1,290 posts)Those are the things ruining the world. What do they all have in common?
Uncle Joe
(58,417 posts)Thanks for the thread, marmar.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)some of their "hard earned" wealth. Hell and/or the earth will freeze over first. It appears to me that the quest for power is stronger in our human nature than being altruistic. Possibly, after millions die, the wealthy elite might agree to do something. Most likely they will wait too long and the goose that laid the golden egg will be already dead.
Possibly the robot/computer singularity will have occurred and they will continue on in our stead.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)Wealthy elites won't have much to lord power over, or even a non-toxic lake to jet-ski in, should the environment go toes up for the humans.
The trick is to get enough of them to swap end-of-your-nose self-interest for the more enlightened kind, where you notice all of the other boats floating up and down together.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)dotymed
(5,610 posts)a combination of well regulated economic systems to stop the destruction of our world and create a planet that is worth passing on to future generations. Obviously "unfettered (and bastardized) capitalism is unsustainable.
Possibly well regulated capitalism with socialism (not for the corporations and elite as now practiced) could be an option.
FDR's "2nd Bill of Rights" must be a large part. It would codify peoples basic needs..ie..health care for all, a guaranteed living wage, guaranteed living standards or the disabled, retired, elderly, etc..
IMO, using this as a building block, we can guarantee some basic economic fairness.
As for our planet, it is clear that we must immediately turn to renewable resources. Just by doing that, we can employ most people (in the short run) retooling our current, unsustainable model. This will lead to many innovations just like the "space race" did.
Of course, returning to pre-Reagan taxation of the wealthy is a no-brainer.
Bernie Sanders would be an excellent choice to usher in and guarantee that the least among us become a relic of a past era.
Saving our planet is the perfect time to save our country and transform America into a country of equals.