General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsProfessor Richard Wolff: Debating Capitalism - Redefining Outdated Terms
Debating Capitalism - Redefining Outdated Terms
Saturday, 21 September 2013 09:16
By Richard D Wolff, Truthout | Opinion
Reasonable conversation about capitalism is possible again. Debates about its strengths and weaknesses resume. The United States post-1950 taboo against honestly evaluating capitalism finally is fading. The public increasingly ignores over-the-top celebrations of capitalism as humanity's peak achievement, God's choice, perpetual prosperity generator or guarantor of individual freedom. Politicians, journalists and academics could stop their uncritical cheerleading for capitalism, although most still pay their bills that way.
The reasons are many. Capitalism no longer "delivers the goods" to most Americans. With consumer debt already high, more borrowing can no longer postpone hard times. The "American Dream" slips farther out of reach. As Cold War memories recede, labels like socialism or communism no longer stifle debate. Destroyed cities like Detroit; students with unsustainable debts; declining wages, benefits and job security; and millions unemployed or foreclosed - to them, the usual rationalizations of capitalism seem hollow and ridiculous.
This July's national survey found 26 percent of Americans believing that capitalism is "not working too well" and another 16 percent that capitalism is "not working at all well." Imagine the consequences if a new political party arose to represent those 42 percent by demanding basic changes in the economic system.
However, that survey and resumed debates about capitalism have not yet faced or solved a shared problem. Widespread confusion and disagreement surround what capitalism means and thus what exactly "is not working." This situation weakens the clarity and appeal of solutions offered by capitalism's critics. .....................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/18323-debating-capitalism-redefining-outdated-terms
BelgianMadCow
(5,379 posts)something Occupy really helped with, imho.
Ron Green
(9,823 posts)and more and more are thinking about it and acting on it.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Capitalism is smoothly morphing into oligarchy just like it's designed. Past time for "conversations", it's time for action.
Silent3
(15,334 posts)It's easily taken advantage of to create oligarchy, but it isn't designed to do that or anything else.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)morph into oligarchy.
Silent3
(15,334 posts)...without restraint and vigilance.
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)BOG PERSON
(2,916 posts)n/t
Silent3
(15,334 posts)...and it doesn't have to be formally adopted, it pretty much just happens when a fairly minimal set of conditions exist.
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)as workable.
All the workers have become the board of directors. They collectively employ themselves. They democratically decide what, how and where to produce and how to use net revenues.
I do agree that a more equitable and agreeable relationship between the leaders and the workers is much to be desired; but this goes too far the other way. In theory you have managers and executives because they can see the whole picture; the person who works at one part of the factory floor can't be expected to have all the knowledge to understand what should be done; they don't have the expertise.
But then I am pro-well regulated capitalism. People are naturally selfish and venal - the best way forward is to set interests off of each other so that things go as smoothly as possible.
Bryant
Ron Green
(9,823 posts)for their expertise. They can fire them as well. The key is that people ought to be more involved in their enterprises than just "Do your eight and hit the gate."
Regulations? They've always been co-opted, watered down, eventually dismantled. That's what capitalists do.