Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Capitalism: Fight with monopolies
  • As you may know, all western politicians like to fight with capitalism laws - with forming of monopolies. Fighting is never successful, but they never really tell you why they still fight em, except that "monopolies are bad and they damage invisible free concurrent market hand" (capitalists are also bad, but I still do not see them marching with ropes to hang themselves).

    And what is the state? It is an organisation of the ruling class — in Germany, for instance, of the Junkers and capitalists. .. It is in fact war-time state-monopoly capitalism, or, to put it more simply and clearly, war-time penal servitude for the workers and war-time protection for capitalist profits.

    Now try to substitute for the Junker-capitalist state, for the landowner-capitalist state, a revolutionary-democratic state, i.e., a state which in a revolutionary way abolishes all privileges and does not fear to introduce the fullest democracy in a revolutionary way. You will find that, given a really revolutionary-democratic state, state- monopoly capitalism inevitably and unavoidably implies a step, and more than one step, towards socialism!

    For if a huge capitalist undertaking becomes a monopoly, it means that it serves the whole nation. If it has become a state monopoly, it means that the state (i.e., the armed organisation of the population, the workers and peasants above all, provided there is revolutionary democracy) directs the whole undertaking. In whose interest?

    Either in the interest of the landowners and capitalists, in which case we have not a revolutionary-democratic, but a reactionary-bureaucratic state, an imperialist republic.

    Or in the interest of revolutionary democracy—and then it is a step towards socialism.

    For socialism is merely the next step forward from state-capitalist monopoly. Or, in other words, socialism is merely state-capitalist monopoly which is made to serve the interests of the whole people and has to that extent ceased to be capitalist monopoly.

    There is no middle course here. The objective process of development is such that it is impossible to advance from monopolies (and the war has magnified their number, role and importance tenfold) without advancing towards socialism.

    Lenin, 1917

    If you read this, you understand actions of capitalists. Main idea was to avoid state monopolies and make them global ones (you can not change economics laws anyway). This is one of the reasons of fierce privatization even with huge damages to everything. Not that it changes fate of capitalists, no. But it buys them some time. But this time is running out now.

  • 18 Replies sorted by
  • " it buys them some time. But this time is running out now."

    and what comes next?

  • and what comes next?

    Small hint - towards socialism

  • Do you have an opinion of Universal Basic Income? Based on glances at its reddit forum, the proponents like to distinguish it as something different from socialism

  • Based on glances at its reddit forum, the proponents like to distinguish it as something different from socialism

    Well, I have no idea that can connect this carrot for hamsters to socialism. May be too much drugs and alcohol residues?

  • UBI seems attractive to me; in fact I don't see any other way to maintain society as the downward pressure on employment becomes absolute. Socialism seems to be largely rejected and villianized in the West so I don't see it coming anytime soon.

  • UBI seems attractive to me; in fact I don't see any other way to maintain society as the downward pressure on employment becomes absolute

    UBI is just absolute form of alienation of the worker from the work. Extreme case destined to fail.

    Socialism seems to be largely rejected and villianized in the West so I don't see it coming anytime soon.

    Rejected by whom exactly?

    Last time I checked capitalists never saw it coming anytime soon, yet they had been proven wrong.

  • A few quotes from Milton Friedman may resonate with some:

    “Concentrated power is not rendered harmless by the good intentions of those who create it.”

    “Indeed, a major source of objection to a free economy is precisely that it gives people what they want instead of what a particular group thinks they ought to want. Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.”

    “A society that puts equality before freedom will get neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both.”

    “Government has three primary functions. It should provide for military defense of the nation. It should enforce contracts between individuals. It should protect citizens from crimes against themselves or their property. When government -- in pursuit of good intentions -- tries to rearrange the economy, legislate morality, or help special interests, the costs come in inefficiency, lack of motivation, and loss of freedom. Government should be a referee, not an active player.”

  • A few quotes from Milton Friedman may resonate with some

    Yet they do not resonate outside capitalists :-)

    All similar points, but better and by smarter man had been proposed in 19th century.

    Smart people need just to remember things they saw, stand, and look around, to understand how each and every of this quotes are incompatible to reality.

  • robertGL, socialism is already practiced in the U.S. fostered largely (but not entirely) by the Democrats in Washington. It's a matter of semantics and degree.

  • socialism is already practiced in the U.S. fostered largely (but not entirely) by the Democrats in Washington. It's a matter of semantics and degree.

    It is matter of complete mess in peoples heads and your head specifically. As to use words you need to understand meaning first.

  • "Smart people need just to remember things they saw, stand, and look around, to understand how each and every of this quotes are incompatible to reality."

    Friedman didn't state this is how things are, but rather how we'd be better off if they were the case. I personally agree with Friedman. Socialism, in my humble opinion, concentrates power in the hands of a government and it's officials who aren't really motivated by equity and efficiency. They only care about getting bigger, controlling more assets, dictating morality and lifestyle and redistributing said assets through inefficient bureaucratic channels to further their political power bases and accrue more dominance. Altruistic government is an oxymoron. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. ; )

    All that said, the world has become increasingly socialistic over the past few decades to the point where there is no turning back to a purely free market economy. To me, the big question in the U.S. is whether the two seemingly contradictory philosophies can co-exist in a compromised way and operate together create a functional, long-term economy that's vibrant and growing? The jury's still out on that.

    It may like trying to combine oil and water. You can temporarily shake it together through great effort and it appears to blend, only to separate over time.

  • Friedman didn't state this is how things are, but rather how we'd be better off if they were the case. I personally agree with Friedman. Socialism, in my humble opinion, concentrates power in the hands of a government and it's officials who aren't really motivated by equity and efficiency. They only care about getting bigger, controlling more assets, dictating morality and lifestyle and redistributing said assets through inefficient bureaucratic channels to further their political power bases and accrue more dominance. Altruistic government is an oxymoron. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. ; )

    I already told you - you have mess in your head.

    But good thing is that you want to understand things, make them more clear. Ideas of individual freedom and their conflict with socium are also very important.

    I suggest to go from Friedman (3rd rate guy) pass Austrian guys and more deeply - to age where all this ideas had been proposed and later debunked.

  • This one was more as a response to your fine Lenin quote on Capitalism, but it fits here too in the sense or nonsense of how we work under the heel of today's globalized Financiers:

    Behind the glorification of “work” and the tireless talk of the “blessings of work” I find the same thought as behind the praise of impersonal activity for the public benefit: the fear of everything individual. At bottom, one feels now when confronted with work – and what is invariably meant is relentless industry from early till late – that such work is the best police, that it keeps everybody in harness and powerfully obstructs the development of reason, of covetousness, of the desire for independence. For it uses up a tremendous amount of nervous industry and takes it away from reflection, brooding, dreaming, worry, love, and hatred; it always sets a small goal before one’s eyes and permits easy and regular satisfaction. In that way a society in which the members continually work hard will have more security: and security is now adorned as the supreme goddess. And now – horrors! – it is precisely the “worker” who has become dangerous. Dangerous individuals are swarming all around. And behind them, the danger of dangers: the individual.

    -Friedrich Nietzsche

  • This one was more as a response to your fine Lenin quote on Capitalism

    Lot of words, but poor content.

    It is not a response it is poor replay of old old things.

  • It is matter of complete mess in peoples heads and your head specifically. As to use words you need to understand meaning first.

    Most Americans confuse socialism with a social welfare state.

    I suggest to go from Friedman (3rd rate guy) pass Austrian guys

    Clarify please, you're saying skip the Austrian guys? don't bother with them?

  • Clarify please, you're saying skip the Austrian guys? don't bother with them?

    Yep.

    Actually Austrian guys themselves provide links to authors where they got all their ideas (just compiled them and adapted to the target group). I think in other topic we had two books referenced, more are available on their sites.

  • Austrian guys are smart. They catch people who become curious. And fuck their brain hard.

  • On a related note, I believe the Austrian guys are the spiritual dads of the American Libertarian movement. Libertarian elites are infiltrating US B schools and economics departments to propagate the gospel.

    http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2015/10/30/koch-foundations-invest-in-higher-education-indepth.html

    Last summer, a top lieutenant of Charles and David Koch’s vast network of philanthropic institutions, laid bare the billionaire brothers’ strategy to evangelize their gospel of economic freedom. Political success, Kevin Gentry told a crowd of elite supporters attending the annual Koch confab in Dana Point, California, begins with reaching young minds in college lecture halls, thereby preparing bright, libertarian-leaning students to one day occupy the halls of political power. “The [Koch] network is fully integrated, so it’s not just work at the universities with the students, but it’s also building state-based capabilities and election capabilities and integrating this talent pipeline,” he said. “So you can see how this is useful to each other over time,” he continued. “No one else has this infrastructure. We’re very excited about doing it.”