Capitalism, the economic system that drives society, is off-limits to critical review or discussion.

Capitalism, the Absurd System
A View from the United States
By Robert W. McChesney and John Bellamy Foster
June 2010

Perhaps nothing points so clearly to the alienated nature of politics in the present day United States as the fact that capitalism, the economic system that drives the society, is effectively off-limits to critical review or discussion. To the extent that capitalism is mentioned by politicians or pundits, it is regarded in hushed tones of reverence for the genius of the market, its unquestioned efficiency, and its providential authority. One might quibble with a corrupt and greedy CEO or a regrettable loss of jobs, but the superiority and necessity of capitalism—or, more likely, its euphemism, the so-called “free market system”—is simply beyond debate or even consideration. There are, of course, those who believe that the system needs more regulation and that there is room for all sorts of fine-tuning. Nevertheless, there is no questioning of the basics.

This prohibition on critically assessing capitalism begins in the economics departments and business schools of our universities where, with but a few exceptions, it is easier to find an advocate of the immediate colonization of Mars than it is to find a scholar engaged in genuine radical criticism of capitalism. This critical dearth extends to our news media, which have a documented track record of promoting the profit system, and a keen distaste for those that advocate radical change. It reaches all of us in one form or another. Anyone who wishes to participate in civic life quickly grasps that being tagged as anti-free market (or socialist) is a near-certain way to guarantee one’s status as a political outcast. To criticize the system is to criticize the nation and “democracy.”

This is a dream world for those atop the system. Such ideological dominance is worth more than a standing army of a million troops to those wishing to maintain their positions of power and privilege. But the illegitimacy of addressing the nature and logic of capitalism handcuffs almost everyone else. As long as serious treatment of capitalism, the dominant social system, remains off-limits, social science itself is deeply compromised.

The failure of a society so marked in myriad ways by capitalism to confront this central reality can only be seen as a great evasion. It is the refusal to engage in meaningful self-criticism, to seek self-knowledge. Americans are like the proverbial fish unaware of the water that surrounds and permeates their existence.

The question we should ask is: What is society actually like when the veil of money is removed, and the real face of power is seen? Is society, stripped of its ideological cover and reduced to nakedness, one of equality—where four hundred individuals in the United States (the Forbes 400) own almost as much wealth as the bottom half of the population (150 million people)? Is this a rational society, when a trillion dollars each year is spent on the U.S. military? Can it be justified when the system, according to modern science, is pointing to mass extinction of the species, quite possibly humanity itself?

Capitalism’s main economic claim to being an indispensable system is that it promotes economic growth, the benefits of which ostensibly trickle down to the vast majority. Today, however, in the mature capitalist economies, economic growth has slowed to a crawl (though sufficient to threaten the environment). The gains of labor productivity flow upwards by myriad pumps, after which they are seldom allowed to trickle down. The result is a deeply unequal society and generalized economic stagnation, associated with a dearth of effective demand—countered only in part by financial bubbles, which eventually burst with disastrous effects. In the past five decades, the U.S. economy has grown, but at slower and slower rates. The stagnation of the last ten years resembles nothing so much as the stagnation of the 1930s (i.e., the Great Depression years). The same is true to varying extents for all the other rich, mature, capitalist economies.

Read the full article at:

http://monthlyreview.org/100601mcchesney-foster.php

If so, it would look like the beautiful Utopia that Adam Smith promised, and the invisible hand would give everyone a night time happy ending...so really now, we must be talking about something different.


Im going to call it Kronycorporatifascism, and hate it instead. Oh, as soon as we do away with this, I can't wait to have real capitalism back once more!


In the meantime, leave capitalism alone!

:thumbsup:

But two unrecs w/no reply while I wrote this.

Its nothing short of awesome.

You weren't allowed to criticize BEFORE he screwed up because - you had to give the plan a chance
You weren't allowed to criticize WHILE he screwed up because - talking down something could hurt it
You weren't allowed to criticize AFTER he screwed up because - that was monday morning quarterbacking


so you could only criticize as long as it wasn't before during or after him screwing up

in our country. We bow down to the word that has become an unwritten part of our constitution and the American Dream.

A good read!



K&R

:kick:

The linked article is a criticism of capitalism. The article is there on the web site. It hasn't been banned. It hasn't been taken down.

There's plenty of criticism of capitalism here on DU all of the time.

That criticism may not be widely embraced. It may not be popular. It may produce critical responses of the original criticism of capitalism. None of that makes criticism of capitalism "off limits". No point of view automatically deserves a rolling out of the red carpet, a warm embrace, and a cheerful "Thank you for sharing!".

If you have an unpopular point of view that you think deserves to be more popular, you have to be prepared to face opposition and to fight hard to convince people you're right and they're wrong. What else should anyone expect?