Prof. Richard Wolff: Capitalism - Not China - Is to Blame for the Current Global Economic Decline

[marmar]

Capitalism - Not China - Is to Blame for the Current Global Economic Decline

Tuesday, 22 December 2015 10:10
By Richard D. Wolff, Truthout | Op-Ed


Capitalism, like a speeding train, barreled into a stone wall in 2008. Shocked and dazed, its leaders have been trying to "recover." By that, they mean to fix the mangled tracks, reposition the locomotive and cars on those tracks and resume forward motion. No basic economic change, in their view, is needed or even considered. They see no absurdity in such a "recovery plan" - just as they saw no approaching catastrophe in the years leading up to 2008.

It was Marx who clearly explained in Capital the contradiction capitalism's leaders rarely grasp. Showing how capitalists compete (and survive in competition) by maximizing profits, he focused his readers on capitalists' strategies of "economizing" on the number of workers they hire (often by substituting machines) and/or replacing more costly workers with cheaper employees. The contradiction emerges when their economizing undermines the market for what capitalists must sell to survive. Boosting their profits by saving on labor often reduces laborers' total purchasing power, what they can afford to buy from capitalists. That hurts capitalists' sales and profits. Likewise, when workers' wages and salaries rise, the resulting benefits to capitalists' sales can be partially or totally reversed as higher wages cut into profits. The history of capitalism often wobbles between the poles of this contradiction.

Starting in the 1970s, capitalism intensified its economizing on labor. This became possible because huge new supplies of labor power entered the orbits of the established old centers of capitalism (Western Europe, North America and Japan). Most of those new, additional workers had previously been excluded from the labor forces available to those old centers. They had been kept away inside capitalism's formal and informal colonies in Asia, Latin America and Africa or else inside state capitalisms (Soviet Russia, Eastern Europe and China). After the 1970s, such workers were brought into direct capitalist employment either by migrating to Western Europe, North America and Japan or by the movement of capitalist enterprises from old to new centers (China, India, Brazil etc.).

Integrating those newly available workers into globalizing capitalism raised the total supply of labor power far above capitalists' demand for it. That supply-demand imbalance sharply lowered their wage bills and boosted their profits. Capitalists' lower outlays for workers' wages might have quickly depressed the purchasing power of the total working class, undermined the market demand for capitalists' output and thereby depressed profits: another case study of capitalist contradiction. However, the 1970s saw a quite unique development that postponed the depression of working-class demand. A massive expansion of consumer credit (mortgage debt, car loans, credit cards etc.) in the old capitalist centers took off. After the 1970s, workers offset stagnant or falling real wages there by borrowing.

.....(snip).....

The eventual effect of capitalism's contradiction (notwithstanding its temporary postponement via credit) was predictable. Chinese production would slow down and thus cut its demands for raw materials, energy and many other basic production inputs. Falling sales of those inputs are now decimating the many national and regional economies that became dependent upon selling those inputs to the Chinese and other new capitalist centers. Thus global economic decline persists - notwithstanding the endlessly hyped "recoveries." .................(more)

http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/34095-capitalism-not-china-is-to-blame-for-the-current-global-economic-decline

[redstateblues]

1. Richard D. Wolff-everyone's favorite self avowed Marxist

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_D._Wolff

[marmar]

2. And?

[redstateblues]

3. Marxism was a failure in the 20th century

The Soviet Union for instance.

[marmar]

4. Perhaps you should read his critiques.

Capitalism is failing in the 21st.

[Ed Suspicious]

10. The Soviet Union bastardized Marx's ideas. Marx didn't call for state control of anything. He saw

state as an extension of the bourgeoisie. Marx advocated a sort of extreme version of democracy where people worked together for the good of the people. Statist control simply was not his model.

Unless I misunderstand my Marx.

[Igel]

52. There was a political movement in the late 1890s and early 1900s like that.

It called for a lot of cottage industry--a business might be a person or a couple of people, perhaps a family. Nothing much larger than that. The people would work for the good of their families and their community. Socialist, it was.

It got mixed up with preserving identity and culture, avoiding cultural contamination and cultural appropriation. Sort of a call to return one's community to its roots and traditions and refusing to assimilate. It had nationalist roots, which was a common movement during this time. Independence movements, self-determination, and all that.

The movement's name came from the two strands of political thought, and was (self-)dubbed "national socialism." You may have heard of it. With a few shifts in philosophy it gained a lot of adherents, but ultimately ended badly. One might say "very badly," at the risk of hyperbole.

Part of the problem was defining what "the people" was. It's the same problem we have today when we talk about "the people." Some intend for it to be exclusionary--some people aren't really folk like the rest of us. Sometimes they're wealthier, more educated, or look or speak funny. In any event, they're not really the folk we're interested in helping. That's no more principled and just as self-serving as when the line "we, the people" were penned to claim universal rights while denying women many of them and slaves (whatever they were called) even more. "The people" were a subset of the population.


Ultimately the problem is the same everywhere, for both socialism and capitalism: One has to buy into the idea of free will and individuality tempered by a set of shared values. When the shared values aren't shared, then there is no basis for socialism holding together. This works if there are only a few renegades, but if more than that the choice is letting the economic (not political or democratic) system unravel or imposing that system on unwilling members through government power.

When the shared values aren't shared, then there are no constraints on individualistic gaming of the commons that capitalism presupposes. If there are only a few abusers of the commons, that's fine, but if more than that the choice is either letting the economic system unravel or imposing constraints on unwilling members through government power.

[TransitJohn]

11. "Marxism" wasn't really tried in the 20th Century

Maybe you should read some Marx.

[TIME TO PANIC]

24. The U.S.S.R. was socialist in name only.

[Bubzer]

35. And how exactly is that relevant to the problems of capitalism?

[EdwardBernays]

41. Marxism

Has never really been tried.

Not that it would ever work necessarily, but pretending it was tried and failed does nothing for anyone.

[lumberjack_jeff]

77. Marx was right about the capitalism end-game, even if his solution wasn't. n/t

[leftstreet]

5. DURec

[WillyT]

6. HUGE K & R !!! - THANK YOU !!!

[LittleBlue]

7. No, Wolff, we've no interest in communism

Failed ideologies that impoverish the masses aren't an answer. Ask anyone under the Soviet Union or Mao's China.

[marmar]

8. Neither does Richard Wolff.

If you're going to disagree, try to do it in a way that's not so intellectually dishonest.

[LittleBlue]

12. He's just another Marxist hack who had to modify his position after the fall of the soviets

When it became obvious that Marxism had led to the deaths of millions and impoverishment of over 1 billion people, postmodern Marxists like him rebranded Marxism as empty criticisms of capitalism.

His totalitarian ideologies failed and he's trying again under a different guise.

Economically, Russia Is Roughly Where the United States Was In The 1950's

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markadomanis/2013/04/26/economically-russia-is-roughly-where-the-united-states-was-in-the-1950s/

Poverty, totalitarianism, technological backwardness, and starvation. That's where Marxism leads. Not interested in what he's selling.

[marmar]

15. Worker co-ops are "totalitarian" ?

Strange interpretation of words.

[LittleBlue]

17. It's not going to work

Nobody believed in this new attempt at benevolent Marxism. It failed, it killed countless people, get over it.

[marmar]

19. Nothing has killed more people than the capitalist exploitation of this planet....

..... whether it be wars for oil, blood diamonds in Africa, forced regime change in Chile or the current climate crisis. I don't know whether your ignorance of this is willful or not, but it's ignorance. But I suspect you know that.
But capitalism has now reached the point where it's cannibalizing itself, so perhaps you should "get over it."

[LittleBlue]

21. Wrong!

The Great Leap ended in catastrophe, resulting in tens of millions of deaths,[3] estimated from 18 million to 32.5[4] or 45 million.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward

Ever wonder why China dumped Marxism in the 80s and became much wealthier as a result? Proof

The Holodomor (Ukrainian: Голодомо́р, "Extermination by hunger" or "Hunger-extermination";[2] derived from морити голодом, "to kill by starvation&quot [3][4][5] was a man-made famine in the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic in 1932 and 1933 that killed an estimated 2.5–7.5 million Ukrainians, with millions more counted in demographic estimates. It was part of the wider disaster, the Soviet famine of 1932–33, which affected the major grain-producing areas of the country.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor

Ever wonder why Russia became wealthier as they privatized during the 90s?



How is North Korea these days?

Both countries are still way behind traditionally capitalist western countries as a result of Marxist thought.

[marmar]

23. Like Greece, Spain, Portugal and the other capitalist basket cases?

[LittleBlue]

25. They're far, far wealthier than any communist nation

How is North Korea doing?

[marmar]

28. Who's advocating communism? It's not the only alternative to capitalism.

[LittleBlue]

29. That's where Marxism leads

Capitalism is the natural state of humanity because it's the only one that can exist without totalitarian force. People will naturally revert to capitalism once totalitarian are removed because it's been in our nature to barter since the beginning of recorded history.

Marxism is a grossly inefficient failure.

[marmar]

32. "because it's the only one that can exist without totalitarian force"

That is a steaming pile.

[LittleBlue]

33. Nope. Every country in the world has already adopted capitalism because it proved the best

Except failed states like North Korea and Zimbabwe

[Ed Suspicious]

49. Huge steaming pile.

Capitalists and their market fetishization drive me nuts. Like it's some natural, unalterable condition. Get real.

[7962]

57. Yet nothing to prove Blue wrong, huh?

Look at that oil rich nation to our south, venezuela. They repudiated capitalism 15 yrs ago. Working out great for them aint it?

[AOR]

59. Your posts in this thread are a grossly inefficient failure...

beyond that you have very little idea what you're talking about. The idea that capitalism is the "natural state of humanity" is beyond laughable. In material reality, it is the exact opposite. The ideas that some like yourself refer to as "scary socialism and communism" were the principles of primitive human societies and tribes before recorded history and since the beginning of human existence. You ignore about a few million years of human survival to defend capitalism at all costs. It goes without saying... that if it wasn't for primitive communal relations the human race wouldn't be around today. Your post is a farce.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primitive_communism

(Snip)

Nature of primitive communist societies

In a primitive communist society, all able bodied persons would have engaged in obtaining food, and everyone would share in what was produced by hunting and gathering. There would be no private property other than articles of clothing and similar personal items, because primitive society produced no surplus; what was produced was quickly consumed. The few things that existed for any length of time (tools, housing) were held communally, in Engels' view in association with matrilocal residence and matrilineal descent.There would have been no state.

Domestication of animals and plants following the Neolithic Revolution through herding and agriculture was seen as the turning point from primitive communism to class society as it was followed by private ownership and slavery, with the inequality that they entailed. In addition, parts of the population specialized in different activities, such as manufacturing, culture, philosophy, and science which is said to lead to the development of social classes.

Primitive communist societies have often been studied by anthropologists such as Margaret Mead.

[LittleBlue]

63. What does that refute? Primitive societies were primitive

They died of simple illnesses and were impoverished.

Capitalism allowed us to be wealthy and live full lifespans. The moment we discovered trade, ultimately leading to industry after the fall of feudalism, we never looked back. Communism was a humanitarian disaster.

Commies = losers

[AOR]

64. It refutes without a shred of doubt...

your absurd assertions that capitalism is the natural state of human civilization and the only possible form of human social relations. Capitalism is a speck in human civilization, not very old, and yet is responsible for the deaths - directly and indirectly - of tens of million of lives and the destruction of hundreds of millions more throughout its insidious history and it continues on its death march unabated. That is the reality of capitalist social relations.

[LittleBlue]

69. Then why have we been capitalist since the fall of hunter gatherer societies?

Capitalism has been the way of humanity since civilization. That is a fact. Pointing to primitive hunter gatherer societies doesn't change that.

The commie romanticists in this forum

[7962]

72. Ha!Yet none of them LIVE in one of those paradises either do they?

No, they're HERE and constantly bitching about which way the wind blows

[LittleBlue]

74. They should try a few days in North Korea

Get the authentic experience

[AOR]

75. You are truely lost and it makes me more than a "little blue" to have to explain...

your conception of the history of civilization is lacking. Your understanding of what capitalism is and how it developed is even more lacking. There are much better and more involved explanations on the introductions of mass commodity production but this will do for now as to your proclamations. Educate yourself.

http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?groupid=458&HistoryID=aa49>rack=pthc

[7962]

73. Maybe you should research how changing to capitalism saved the colonists.

If you care to read about a SUCCESSFUL transformation that continues today and didnt die out like your examples

[AOR]

76. Indeed..

those white European colonists sure were very "successful" in the genocide and subjugation of indigenous peoples. And they sure were "successful" in advancing white supremacy, the Black slave trade, and the institutionalized racism that arose along with modern capitalism. A smashing success from your view I'm sure.

[7962]

85. Ha. What a weak response. But pretty much what i expected.

Change the subject because you've got nothing else. You dont think the indians were being pushed out by the original collectivist colonists as well? The industrialization of the US came long after the end of slavery. Where's the slavery in Germany? Japan? Canada? South Korea? Anything gained by forced work in Germany& Japan was totally destroyed by WW2.
If slavery was responsible for the successes of modern day countries, then why are so many countries who still practice it still 3rd world? In your mind they should rocket to the top of the heap!

[7962]

56. Horseshit. Stalin himself is responsible for then of millions killed.

Capitalism has freed more people from oppression than any other system. Perfect? Of course not. Should there be regulations? Of course there should.
But the successes across the globe show that this attempt to blame capitalism is a crock. Look at the success of Japan and Germany since being totally destroyed in WW2. They've been mostly successful at having a good standard of living for their people.
Very simple; compare the living standards and freedom of the peoples in East Germany to West Germany back in the day.

[AOR]

60. The tattered ghost of Joe McCarthy would be proud...

Last edited Wed Dec 23, 2015, 09:42 PM - Edit history (1)

then again... the wooden dummy Charlie McCarthy also comes to mind when reading your post.

[7962]

70. The usual; insults but nothing to back it up. Sorry the truth hurts your feelings.

Off to venezuela with you! You can party with the party losers! Or maybe Cuba, where its been failing for 50= YRS.
And what Joe McCarthy has to do with pointing out the failures of the past I'll just leave to you.
Nothing I said was false.

[AOR]

78. Well you see...

the problem I have with "your truths" is in dealing with red-baiting foul dogs dropping a stinking dump on threads like this. I then deservedly end up smelling like dog shit - at the end of the day - for stepping into it rather than stepping over it. More's the pity for me I guess.

[7962]

86. Finally we agree; you deserve what you get.

Maybe the stink is the stink of failure you've never been able to wash off. Because failure is what you get with the systems you wish we had in place.
But of course, you are totally free to go make your way in one of those workers paradises. But you wont, because it would suck.

[Igel]

53. Necessarily so, in practice.

Co-ops as an economic system relied on universal buy-in. It wasn't like you could just have a co-op of like-minded people sitting off on the side, surrounded by an economic free-for-all and call it a "government."

We had such co-ops in the US. In fact, we still do. But we don't confuse them with a government or an economic system.



Many did not buy into the idea in the 1920s. Without them, the system was in free-fall. With them, there was too much dissent and confusion. Many of the Soviet leaders honestly believed that they would see communism in their lifetimes.

Ultimately, what was necessary was a strong leader to keep the majority sufficiently invested to all the leader to use force to coerce the unwilling to participate--or silence or even remove the unwilling from society.

In tandem with this was a firm belief that the human soul needed to be re-engineered. People had been corrupted, and a New Man could be forged that would produce the desired outcome. That didn't happen in creches. It didn't happen when the engineers of the human soul had been at work, carefully supervised and monitored in a kind of hothouse for decades. The ideology was starkly at odds with reality, however much many wanted to believe.

[TIME TO PANIC]

27. You're using Forbes.com as a credible source?

Keep drinking the Kool-aid.

[LittleBlue]

30. Keep drinking the red sauce. Capitalism won

Nobody gives a shit. The communist romanticists will never see the implementation of failed Marxist thought again. Ahahaha

[TIME TO PANIC]

40. Fine, stay in the 20th century and let the rest of the world leave you behind.

[LittleBlue]

43. I will. And we'll continue to grow

As North Korea, maybe the last real communist country on earth, starves.

No thanks!

[TIME TO PANIC]

45. Good luck!

[AOR]

62. It would be hard to find more reactionary talking points...

at any pure right-wing haven on the net. Back up your claims with peer reviewed research and no the capitalist produced fairy tail the "black book of communism" doesn't count. You won't because you can't. Your claims are based purely on emotion and a vat of spoon fed propaganda you've been boiled in from birth.

Now on the other hand this is the reality of capitalism that you so righteously defend as "the end of history." While your hunting for the communist boogieman this is your lesson plan for the day...look up the figures on the the dead bodies produced by capitalism and all its far reaching tentacles across the globe over the last century. Start with the Shah of Iran, Marcos, Suharto, Ian Smith, Botha, Hitler, Franco, Mussolini, Martinez, Trujillo, Branco, Selassie, Samoza, Pinochet, Batista and a horde of other Capitalist autocrats and dictators that left a barbaric and bloody trail across the 20th century that totals hundreds of millions.



"Friends Of The United States And Capitalism "

by Dennis Bernstein and Laura Sydell

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Dictators/Friendly_Dictators.html


(Snip)


Many of the world's most repressive dictators have been friends of America. Tyrants, torturers, killers, and sundry dictators and corrupt puppet-presidents have been aided, supported, and rewarded handsomely for their loyalty to US interests. Traditional dictators seize control through force, while constitutional dictators hold office through voting fraud or severely restricted elections, and are frequently puppets and apologists for the military juntas which control the ballot boxes. In any case, none have been democratically elected by the majority of their people in fair and open elections.

They are democratic America's undemocratic allies. They may rise to power through bloody ClA-backed coups and rule by terror and torture. Their troops may receive training or advice from the CIA and other US agencies. US military aid and weapons sales often strengthen their armies and guarantee their hold on power. Unwavering "anti-communism" and a willingness to provide unhampered access for American business interests to exploit their countries' natural resources and cheap labor are the excuses for their repression, and the primary reason the US government supports them. They may be linked internationalIy to extreme right-wing groups such as the World Anti-Communist League, and some have had strong Nazi affiliations and have offered sanctuary to WWll Nazi war criminals.

They usually grow rich, while their countries' economies deteriorate and the majority of their people live in poverty. US tax dollars and US-backed loans have made billionaires of some, while others are international drug dealers who also collect CIA paychecks. Rarely are they called to account for their crimes. And rarely still, is the US government held responsible for supporting and protecting some of the worst human rights violators in the world.
Friendly dictators

Abacha, General Sani ----------------------------Nigeria
Amin, Idi ------------------------------------------Uganda
Banzer, Colonel Hugo ---------------------------Bolivia
Batista, Fulgencio --------------------------------Cuba
Bolkiah, Sir Hassanal ----------------------------Brunei
Botha, P.W. ---------------------------------------South Africa
Branco, General Humberto ---------------------Brazil
Cedras, Raoul -------------------------------------Haiti
Cerezo, Vinicio -----------------------------------Guatemala
Chiang Kai-Shek ---------------------------------Taiwan
Cordova, Roberto Suazo ------------------------Honduras
Christiani, Alfredo -------------------------------El Salvador
Diem, Ngo Dihn ---------------------------------Vietnam
Doe, General Samuel ----------------------------Liberia
Duvalier, Francois --------------------------------Haiti
Duvalier, Jean Claude-----------------------------Haiti
Fahd bin'Abdul-'Aziz, King ---------------------Saudi Arabia
Franco, General Francisco -----------------------Spain
Hitler, Adolf ---------------------------------------Germany
Hassan II-------------------------------------------Morocco
Marcos, Ferdinand -------------------------------Philippines
Martinez, General Maximiliano Hernandez ---El Salvador
Mobutu Sese Seko -------------------------------Zaire
Noriega, General Manuel ------------------------Panama
Ozal, Turgut --------------------------------------Turkey
Pahlevi, Shah Mohammed Reza ---------------Iran
Papadopoulos, George --------------------------Greece
Park Chung Hee ---------------------------------South Korea
Pinochet, General Augusto ---------------------Chile
Pol Pot---------------------------------------------Cambodia
Rabuka, General Sitiveni ------------------------Fiji
Montt, General Efrain Rios ---------------------Guatemala
Salassie, Halie ------------------------------------Ethiopia
Salazar, Antonio de Oliveira --------------------Portugal
Somoza, Anastasio Jr. --------------------------Nicaragua
Somoza, Anastasio, Sr. -------------------------Nicaragua
Smith, Ian ----------------------------------------Rhodesia
Stroessner, Alfredo -----------------------------Paraguay
Suharto, General ---------------------------------Indonesia
Trujillo, Rafael Leonidas -----------------------Dominican Republic
Videla, General Jorge Rafael ------------------Argentina
Zia Ul-Haq, Mohammed ----------------------Pakistan

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Capitalism, Fascism and World War 2

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Fascism/Capitalism_Fascism_WW2.html

(Snip)

"Most Americans know enough about the Nazi holocaust to thoroughly despise the horrible events that occurred- the torture, executions, concentration camps, forced starvation, gas chambers and the attempted extermination of the Jews. I wonder what Americans would think if they knew that the part of this Nazi terror apparatus which operated on the Russian front was incorporated into the CIA after World War 2. The Nazi SS officer was Reinhard Gehlen, and he and his group were employed by the CIA for their knowledge of the Soviet Union. The SS death squads that followed the German advance into the Soviet Union were very brutal,killing any communists and Jews they found. The CIA used Nazi war criminals like Klaus Barbie, Walter Rauff, Otto Skorzeny and others in South America to impart their knowledge of torture techniques and concentration camps to the police and militaries there. Klaus Barbie was involved in the 1980 Bolivian coup known as the "cocaine coup" that is described in former DEA agent Michael Levine's book The Big White Lie."

(Snip)

"American corporations invested heavily in Nazi Germany, and many like General Motors and Ford had factories there, which also used slave labor and produced war materials for the Nazis. US corporate investment in Germany accelerated rapidly after Hitler came to power. Investment increased 48.5% between 1929 and 1940, while declining in the rest of continental Europe. American bombers deliberately avoided hitting these US factories, and they received compensation from the American taxpayer for any damage after the war. US oil companies sold oil to the Nazis and oil on credit to the fascists in Spain."

(Snip)

"Many American capitalists were openly sympathetic to the Nazis. Henry Ford wrote a book called The International Jew: The World's Foremost Problem, and he is mentioned in Mein Kampf. James Mooney, the General Motors executive in charge of European operations, was awarded the Order of Merit of the Golden Eagle by Adolph Hitler. There were op-ed pieces by Nazis like Hermann Goehring in Hearst newspapers in the United States."

(Snip)

"The Nazis broke unions, lowered wages, abolished overtime pay, decreased business taxes and increased business subsidies."

[Wounded Bear]

9. I can understand why you feel that way...

Given Capitalism's success in impoverishing the masses, why try some other ideology?

[LittleBlue]

14. Capitalism has enriched the masses more than any other idea in history

Pulled China, a once impoverished nation, out of poverty when it dumped the failure of communism.

You don't know what you're talking about. Communism is the biggest cause of poverty in history.

[TIME TO PANIC]

46. +1

[Vincardog]

13. Capitalism is designed to impoverish the masses, it is working as designed

[LittleBlue]

16. It isn't, actually

Humanity has never been so wealthy under any other system.

Capitalism is poverty for some. Communism is poverty for all.

[LittleBlue]

26. 99.99999% of China was in poverty under communism

Same as North Korea.

[LittleBlue]

36. Because China switched to capitalism

That's why their standards have risen!

[LittleBlue]

42. Uh no we did it right

Hence why Americans are many times wealthier than the Chinese, per capita. And better technology. And better.... everything. Which is why they move here.

[Yorktown]

88. Nice job on this thread

Communism doesn't work. Period.

[TIME TO PANIC]

31. Capitalism is like a religion to some.

It's useless trying to reach them.

[Ed Suspicious]

50. This.

[AOR]

68. Let me know next time you want to take a trip to Newark New Jersey...

I'm sure many of those folks will be interested in hearing your pontifications on how humanity has never been so wealthy. After that... we'll pencil you in for a trip to some third world countries where millions are reduced to abject poverty and obscene living conditions by the tentacles of American Imperialism and capitalism and where people exist on exist on less than 2 dollars a day. You should be embarrassed posting the garbage you are on a site that supposedly represents something resembling the left. Don't know about trolls but there are a hell of a lot of 10 thousand post Joe McCarthy clones floating around here and as loyal to the cause as a bunch of Conservative Cavers at a right-wing keg party in the Sandhills Of Nebraska.

[LittleBlue]

71. That's because you're talking about poverty in relative terms

Last edited Thu Dec 24, 2015, 12:12 PM - Edit history (1)

You're comparing their poverty to the current middle class. There was no middle class before capitalism. People starved to death under communism. Are people in New Jersey starving to death?

[AOR]

80. People are starving to death every day all over the world...

due to the insidious spread of global capitalism and imperial wars for the profit of a global ruling class of capitalist parasites on the human condition. Add in climate change and the locust like consumption bender created by those bloodsuckers and it will only get worse.

[LittleBlue]

87. People routinely starved under feudalism. We ended starvation for the vast majority of the world

under capitalism. Hence the explosion in population after industrialization and privatization of land in the 1800s.




Starvation used to be common on every continent for every people.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malthusian_trap

[TIME TO PANIC]

18. Thanks for the post.

I look forward to his lectures every month.

[Throd]

37. He has been giving the same lecture for years.

He just rearranges the words.

[TIME TO PANIC]

44. I hope he continues.

He's actually beginning to get through. Probably because most of the people indoctrinated by the Red Scare are dying off.

[Throd]

47. I bet most of DU doesn't even know who he is.

Outside of here his voice is a fart in a tornado.

[Yorktown]

20. With all undue respect, Richard Wolff is an ass

1- Capitalism is the default position. It can -and should- be regulated, but there is no known substitute for private ownership to make things work

2- The current downturn is classic Kondratieff. Richard Wolff probably knows it, but he's too busy selling his economic pet pipe dreams.

3- If the current downturn was to be blamed on something other than Kondratieff, it would be on excess social programs (Freddy Mac and Fanny Mae terms), hardly something Richard Wolff would acknowledge.

Anyway, all this overlooks the fact the planet's economy is still growing, the zones having enjoyed excessive weight (US, Europe) being slowly brought back to size.

[LittleBlue]

39. Well said

[redstateblues]

48. Good work little blue

Spanking the commies with irrefutable data

[AOR]

65. Yes "fine work" indeed...

makes one wonder where such "work" is originating from. The only thing missing is the scratchy black and white film and scary music rolling in the backround with flashing images of Stalin standing on Red Square as the tanks roll by. Right out of the McCarthy playbook. I'm pretty sure references to the "Marxist" Pol Pot is next on the agenda.

[Ed Suspicious]

51. Ah, you're one of those people who feels the west needs to be brought back to reality through

decreased labor standards, lower wages, and more instability. All this through the righteousness of competition. Of course the Western CEO and boards of directors who exploit these low wage workers enriching themselves to inconceivable proportions, we'll they're the noble, rightful winners in this game and that's the way it's supposed to be.

[Yorktown]

66. I am not judging, merely recording an inevitable fact

What gives the US+EU the right to an eternally higher per capita GDP than China or India?

It's a fairly recent phenomenon, less than a handful centuries, and was bound to fade.

[Igel]

54. Capitalism is far from the default position.

It requires a lot of social trust and cultural/economic underpinnings to work. Without sufficient wealth, it's hard to have more capitalism than a lot of cottage industries. The first real shock to come along can make that system falter and "break symmetry" in a sense. The primary two alternatives would be to collectivize and centralize things or scatter. Or yield.

Seems to me that we had something like warlords/monarchs in a kind of feudalism in which the peasants weren't tied to the land as serfs but which were obligated to pledge fealty and tribute, sometimes a lot of tribute. In the countryside, you'd be able to be independent and resist this; in the larger villages and in towns there'd be a stark division of labor that was carefully supervised and maintained. We read capitalist tendencies into this, but that "carefully supervised and maintained" is important--a baker without access to the overlord's granaries didn't get very far, and a potter that couldn't easily import wood from the town's wood supply had the same problem. It was a necessary precondition for urban centers given the risk of invasion/siege and famine.

[Yorktown]

67. Are you suggesting feudalism is an attractive substitute for free markets?

[meaculpa2011]

55. If Professor Wolff believes that more democracy...

in the workplace will solve all of our problems why has he never launched an enterprise based on his own principles?

He has been touting Mondragon/Fagor for many years. How's that been working out.

The paradox is that here Professor Wolff or anyone else is free to establish a worker-owned cooperative. Can a Cuban or North Korean citizen launch a private business?

[Ed Suspicious]

58. He's an academic doing what academics do. Working in academia.

Last edited Wed Dec 23, 2015, 08:51 PM - Edit history (1)

[U4ikLefty]

61. Capitalism is a religion to many selfish Americans

as this thread demonstrates.

Richard Wolff has more cred as an Economist than the fools on this thread screaming "commie!!1!1"

BTW, his weekly lectures are available for free download.

[Ron Green]

79. The fact that people on this thread are flogging GDP

and don't seem to be aware of GPI indicates how far we've got to go.

[KT2000]

81. Private Equity & Holding Cos

buy American manufacturing businesses. The business is usually the result of a single owner who built the business. They want to retire so they sell the business to a private equity firm or holding company. The firms then move the manufacturing to Asia. They push for cheaper production costs and allow the quality of the product to be degraded to save money. Accounting is still done on their centralized system in America so are considered American companies.

The owners of the firms then buy expensive art and build mansions with their windfall.