Toward Socialism: A preliminary and therefore provisional diagnosis of symptoms—i.e., what ails us—including a brief etiology of the principal causal variable and a proposed therapeutic regimen.
A fairly large number of working class folks who voted for
Trump appear to think that populist economic nationalism (granted, this may in
some measure be merely a rhetorical smokescreen) and protectionist (or
mercantilist) trade policies will perform an economic miracle, bringing about
socio-economic security and the realization of middle-class dreams. (Ironically,
or not, if one examines the early history of capitalism, protectionist policies
and state intervention can—and have—work(ed) for emerging polities dedicated to
economic development.) This demonstrates the remarkable effectiveness of being
socialized into political and economic ideologies that refuse to historically
and analytically conceptualize capitalism in its latest global incarnation. People
simply don’t understand (or have succumbed to a colossal state of denial about)
the “big-picture” consequences of the frenzied pursuit of profit and the
ruthless competition between firms, including the endless search for cheap or
cheaper labor markets. They appear to lack a sufficient grasp of the consequences
of capital’s unbridled exploitation of technological innovation by way of
supplanting (the costs of) labor. The intransigent nature of these ideologies
has not prepared them for the increasing frequency of “boom and bust” cycles or
periodic general crises that are “natural” to capitalism. The intransigent
nature of these ideologies has precluded a grasp of the historic role of
organized labor, social democratic parties and Leftist social movements in
enhancing the welfare and well-being of the lives of working people, in
prompting changes that have mitigated the harshest effects of capitalism, and
in acting as the principal collective agents for the melioration of capitalism
itself. It is neither an incidental nor an accidental fact that “the dramatic
rise in the ratio of profits to wages provides a material foundation for the
sharp rise in the overall income inequality” (Anwar Shaikh), for in the absence
of a strong and broad coalition of Leftist forces, capital has its way with
labor, and the ill-effects reverberate throughout the social order (cf. Göran Therborn’s The Killing Fields of Inequality, 2013).
No U.S. president, whether Democrat Republican, can play a
messianic role in saving us from the mortal sins of contemporary capitalism.
Yes, states—or the State—can intervene directly in the balance of power between
capital and labor, but when they (or it) systematically intervene on behalf of
the former over the latter (with the collusion or collaboration of
non-governmental global institutions like the IMF, World Bank, and now, although
this may be changing, the WTO) the poor, working people, and those in the
middle class will suffer (even neoliberals rely on the power of the State to
implement fiscal conservativism and monetarist policies). There is evidence
aplenty that this is already occurring with the Trump regime: the inability to
see or acknowledge such evidence confirms once more the power of prevailing
ideologies (wherein capitalism is ‘the best’ or ‘only’ economic system, the
problem being solely which kind of capitalism one prefers). Yet “even in the
best welfare states, social expenditures and taxes serve more to redistribute the living standard of
labor than to change its average level. As a whole, labor largely pays for its
own social benefits” (Anwar Shaikh). In short, the power of states to intervene
in the operations of capitalism is severely constrained in a world of deregulated
capital markets: states no longer have the same degree of power they once held
in the period of “national capitalism” (a term that reminds of the diminished
power of Keynesian-inspired states to robustly ‘steer’ the economy and why
Claus Offe wrote about the Contradictions
of the Welfare State and Disorganized
Capitalism). The current round of globalization is a conspicuous “combination
of deregulated capital movements, advances in information/communication/transport
technologies, and a shift in ideology away from social democracy [as well as the
‘Liberal’ capitalist ideologies that buttress liberal or corporatist welfare policies]
and statism towards neoliberalism and libertarianism.” “One consequence of this
new phase,” writes Meghnad Desai, “is that the state no longer controls the
economy, but is one player (a major one of course) among many. The state has to
adapt and adjust to forces which it cannot control but must respond to.”
When working people understandably but myopically lament the
effects of capitalist globalization on their lives (all the while failing to
appreciate the disastrous effects of such microeconomic policies as deregulation
and privatization), they appear to outsiders looking in or those awaiting a
seat at the table as a tad self-centered, unabashedly selfish or simply unrealistic
insofar as they are forgetting, deliberately ignoring or unintentionally neglecting
(a result, in part, of debilitating psychological mechanisms that go hand-in-hand
with ideology construction and maintenance) the historic effects of earlier forms
of globalization on far more vulnerable and poorer peoples on our planet: “colonization,
force, pillage, slavery, slaughter of native [‘indigenous’] peoples, the
targeted destruction of potential competitors, and a huge transfer of wealth
into the rich countries.” This is not to deny the injustice of having their
middle class lives (or the aspirations thereto) cut out from under them, but this
means capitalist globalization is reducing “three worlds” to one, as millions
around the globe are gaining at the expense of the middle classes in the
affluent countries, and even if it is not, to be sure, the “one world” of
principled or democratic cosmopolitans. Governments did not plan this, however
much they have since capitulated to these economic forces: it is the
predictable result of the global consolidation of turbo- and finance-capitalism,
of the increasing power of transnational corporations. And while economic
globalization has an upside in some parts of the world and has been responsible
for a significant reduction in poverty (directly related to the economic
downturn in the affluent countries), substantial local, regional, and international
inequality persists, indeed, it’s often growing, particularly within countries. Once more with Shaikh:
“One could easily well argue that the inequality and lack of democracy on a
global scale is abetted by the political institutions and interests of the ‘democracies’
of patrimonial capitalism.” But the power of these institutions and those
interests is diminishing, hence the ascendance of xenophobic nationalism,
right-wing populism, and fascist authoritarianism, all of which represent in
part a frantic and frightening attempt to regain the political powers that made
for “national capitalism,” albeit sans
any knowledge of the historical sources and sociological context of those
powers. It is nostalgic fantasizing for a lost world, and its tenacious grip on
mind of the masses (at least some of them) bodes ill for all of us.
The Golden Age of capitalism for the “club of the advanced
capitalist countries” is over (and with it, the ‘national capitalism’ that
flourished during this period). Looking back with Desai: “The Keynesian
quarter-century had indeed been a party. Everything had stayed high—employment,
hours worked, vacancies—or grown steadily—income, wealth. The public sector—central
government, local government, public enterprises—had grown without causing any
problems.”
We may look back, but there’s no turning back. And there is no
golden-like age on the horizon, despite the contrary proclivities and desperate
yearnings among those of us old enough to be intimately familiar with this
history. In other words, Keynesianism, post- or otherwise, is behind us, at
least in the long term and globally speaking (it was Keynes, after all, who ‘made
capitalism safe for democracy’). The current conditions are, Desai
provocatively suggests, “analogous to sailing a ship on high seas. The ship has
some machinery for control, but in navigating it, the captain does not control
the waves or the wind. These forces can be studied, but they cannot be
controlled. The captain who ignores or defies these forces may well run the
ship aground or sink altogether.” Put differently, “[c]ycles, with their mania,
crashes, and panics” are here to stay, as they undoubtedly “are endemic to
capitalism” (Desai). And yet it seems implausible if not reckless to speak of
the “imminent collapse” of
capitalism, given its staying power through and beyond the duration of these
cycles: at present and in the near-term, there are only different types or
versions of capitalism, some meaner and some more beneficent than others. One reality
North Americans and Europeans are alike compelled to confront, in spite of recalcitrant
ideological blinkers or blinders: the current phase of capitalist transformation
and entrenchment is truly global. In
the words of Desai,
“The influence of capital—either as portfolio finance or as
direct investment—the hegemony of financial markets, the increasing penetration
of trade, have been experienced by all the worlds: First, Second, and Third.
Indeed, this numerical categorization is now otiose. The benefits and costs of capitalism fall symmetrically—though not
equally—on all parts of the world.
For the first time in two hundred years, the cradle of capitalism—the metropolis,
the core—has as much to fear from the rapidity of change as does the periphery.”
[emphasis added]
It is this fear that has been canalized by the Right (and
projected outward on ‘the Other’), its ideological and political project facilitated
by a considerable number of working class voters punch-drunk on a cocktail of
denial, self-deception, and wishful thinking. The fears, anxieties and anger of
those workers in the (global) metropolis will not be assuaged, let alone
overcome with the accelerated privatization of public goods, the deregulation
of the finance sector, and the evisceration of remnant unionized workers.
The Republican Party generally and the Trump Administration
in particular are shameless in according pride of place to the most perverse of
motivations and incentives (these are not the only motivations and incentives common
to capitalism) associated with capitalist democracy (in its neoliberal
iteration or otherwise) and the visceral and reactionary moods and frustrations
of those—of late—economically disenfranchised (while the poor are subject to
purely punitive policies). No “public benefits” will follow from such motivations
and incentives. But we can predict with some confidence more pain and suffering
for the poor, the disenfranchised, the vulnerable, and the working class in
this country, that is, those outside the privileged pantheon of a political and
economic plutocracy marked by kleptocratic pretensions. A president afflicted with narcissistic
megalomania (and a Midas complex), pubescent character traits and authoritarian
propensities in conjunction with a dispositional aversion to truth (quickened
by a paranoid penchant for conspiracy theories), only amplifies the already
alarming degree and scope of danger that characterizes a political climate
marked by irrationality and unpredictability and suffused with apocalyptic-like
apprehensions.
The Left
must exemplify, in theory and praxis,
the triune principles and virtues of liberté, égalité, and fraternité.
Tenacity, courage, and imagination will likewise be critical in breaking
through the authoritarian social-character armor that has been fashioned from the
more regressive and aggressive socio-cultural and political materials found in
this country’s history: conformism, homophobia, (white and ‘Christian’)
ethno-nationalism, militarism, parochialism, racism, sexism, conspicuous
consumption and acquisitiveness, unbridled ambition, celebrity worship and
fame-seeking, the will to dominate others, in short, the “false consciousness”
well-captured in Erich Fromm’s clever locution, “the pathology of normalcy.” We
will need to avail ourselves of the best of democratic theory and praxis found in liberal, (democratic and
utopian) socialist, anarchist, and communist traditions, taking inspiration
from the many men and women who went before us, including those principled
communists who fought against apartheid in South Africa or came to power in the
Indian state of Kerala or struggled for civil rights and on behalf of organized
workers in U.S. history. These traditions are chock full of lessons for
fighting the demonic forces of xenophobic nationalism and fascism, the evils
incarnate in white supremacy, religious fanaticism and authoritarian populism,
indeed any ideology or movement that embodies the perverse logic of doctrines
and dogmas that deny the fundamental premises of inherent human dignity and
fundamental human rights, that thwart the untrammeled democratic representation
of the will of the people consistent with same, or that evidence little or no
concern with sustainable living in harmony with the ecological and natural
processes on our planet. We will continue to fight the latest iterations of
these backward historical forces. There may be periodic setbacks and localized
defeats in the progressive realization of emancipatory ends, in the extension
of democratic principles and processes beyond electoral politics proper (e.g.,
in the economic realm), but the purification of a “realist,” statist and
right-wing politics, increasingly beholden to fascist or fascist-like sentiment
must continue apace, animated by a compassionate combination of reason and
passion capable of transforming conventional power politics into something
consistent with or at least closer to the kind of life that might be found in
the daily round outside the Platonic
cave, and thus under the nourishing and warm light of the Good, a life in which
gains in global distributive justice mean everyone finds a seat at the
bountiful table, a life in which flourishing becomes a real possibility.
—Patrick S.
O’Donnell (March 3, 2017)
- Desai, Meghnad. Marx’s Revenge: The Resurgence of Statist Capitalism and the Death of Statist Socialism. London: Verso, 2002.
- Shaikh, Anwar. Capitalism: Competition, Conflict, Crises. New York: Oxford University Press, 2016.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home