********************  POSTING RULES & NOTES  ********************
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*****************************************************************

Hi

Below is a piece by me on Steve Keen, the economist:

Steve Keen, the author of Debunking Economics, argues that  economic crises are 
caused by excessive private debt. He claims that the financial sector plays a 
key role in creating this debt. The banks, he argues, are not simple 
intermediaries between lender and borrow. When they lend they increase debt and 
thereby credit and money. He claims that austerity imposed by the state is not 
the solution. For him the latter intensifies the problem. For Keen when private 
debt is contracting cutting back on public debt through austerity simply 
magnifies the problem. On this basis, if anything, the state needs to expand 
its intervention under such conditions. Keen fails to understand that the 
problem is due to lack of total profitability or surplus value. It is then a 
problem located in the process that generates surplus value (profit). The 
problem is not created in the circulation process. Consequently the problem is 
not due to the diminution of private borrowing. The latter is merely a symptom 
of the problem. Hence Increased state borrowing cannot solve the problem. 
Indeed increased state borrowing merely sustains weak private capitalists in 
business. This prevents the crisis from forcing out weak capital as a means 
towards restoring profitability. Keen never informs us as to what, itself, is 
the cause of debt. This is because capital is the source of debt and thereby 
its regulator –the law of value.  The financial system, including the banks, is 
thereby the product of value relations. Keen fails to view social categories 
historically.

Keen, instead, falsely bases the existence of the crisis free stage of the 
economic cycle on subjective factors: psychology and memory. He makes the false 
assumption that memory of the previous debt ridden crisis makes investors and 
others risk adverse. This is hardly a justifiable assumption as a basis for 
offering an understanding of the economic cycle. It makes the false assumption 
that subjective factors standing outside the economic cycle are the cause that 
leads to crises. It also, in a sense, implies that the fading of memory 
explains the shift away from being risk adverse leading to the burgeoning of 
debt. Consequently the cycle of remembering and forgetting is the basis for the 
debt and economic cycles. Now psychology is the ultimate basis for economic 
behaviour. This is no better a basis than the utilitarianism, that Keen 
criticises, as the basis of neo-classical economics. Keen is forced to promote 
a fictitious account of the existence of economic recovery because of his 
repudiation of the process of capitalist production as the core location of 
crises. Because he has rejected a materialist account of the capitalist economy 
based in the production process he must resort to idealistic assumptions. But 
these are no more than mere myths.

The problem with Keen is that he views the problem in reverse. By privileging 
debt as opposed to production he reverses the problem thereby taking surface 
appearances as the source of the problem. For him result is cause. But the  
problem is not excessive debt but the opposite: over-investment of capital  
with respect to the degree of exploitation obtaining. It is this that is 
responsible for excessive debt. Capital is over-produced in relation to 
profitability. 


In contrast for  Keen over-accumulation of capital is driven and facilitated by 
excessive accumulation of debt. Credit not production is cause. He fails to 
understand the opposite to be the case. The over-accumulation of debt is a 
product of the over-accumulation of capital.  Because there is an ultimate 
limit to the overproduction of capital there is a limit to the scale of 
possible debt. As capital accelerates to such a degree that it turns into 
over-accumulation credit consequently contracts. It is over-accumulation that 
causes both excessive debt and the consequent credit contraction. Under these 
circumstances the ratio of debt to GDP spirals out of control. But this ratio 
is merely an index that over-production of capital has occurred. 

The contraction of credit manifests itself on financial markets through the 
emergence of wild speculation. Eventually there is a credit crunch. Credit 
thereby becomes less available to make investments and to meet debt 
obligations. This is a chain like reaction.

The state steps in to compensate for private credit contraction through what is 
known today as quantitative easing. This prevents the contraction from 
sufficiently deepening to make a robust recovery a reality. Consequently the 
conditions for a real  recovery never assert themselves. This then leads to  
further problems. To realise real recovery the crisis needs to deepen 
sufficiently to restore profitability. This is because the general rate of 
profit is the source of the problem –not debt. This means that many weaker 
capitalists are eliminated. It also entails the pauperisation of much of the 
working class. It is the restoration of profitability through the destruction 
and devaluation of capital that creates the conditions for recovery. But under 
certain very adverse conditions war may be a necessary condition too. This was 
the case in the period leading up to the Second World War. And the Great 
Depression, then, was obviously not caused by excessive debt accumulation.  
Under these conditions the fall in the general rate of profit is arrested and 
restored to a higher rate.

However this does not provide  a permanent solution to the capitalist economic 
crisis. The contradictions ultimately reassert themselves. Ultimately the only 
solution is the elimination of the existence of social relations in the form of 
value relations. This is achieved through the realisation of communism by 
social revolution.

Keen maintains that the problem is caused by the excessively high ratio of debt 
to GDP. Debt here is a multiple of the GDP. This, he claims, becomes 
increasingly unsustainable eventually leading to a steep fall in asset prices. 
Under these circumstances Ponzi finance is the first to collapse. This 
initiates a domino effect that runs right through the financial system. For 
Keen modern capitalism is powered by debt. The debt cycle drives the economic 
cycle. 

The possibility of the existence of credit relations originates in money’s 
function as means of payment. The possibility of credit is a product of the 
inner nature of the capitalist mode of production itself.  The limits of the 
valorisation of capital determines the limits of credit and debt. Not the 
reverse as Keen holds. The more profitable capital is, the more credit becomes 
available. The quantity of capital and the scale of its valorisation dictate 
the degree to which  credit and debt can expand. Capital constrains credit 
expansion. Otherwise it's expansion would proceed ad infinitum. Then growth 
would prove an endless process. But the more disproportionate the volume of 
credit in relation to industrial capital the greater the intensity of the 
contradictions that manifest themselves. The rate of credit expansion is forced 
to contract. Credit turns into its opposite. This contraction entails a fall in 
demand and a corresponding contraction of the economy. Excessive accumulated 
debt is the appearance of the crisis not its cause.

The  underlying cause is the inadequate valorisation of capital. It's 
inadequate expansion. Credit expansion and debt is capital’s attempt to 
overcome its immanent limits or barriers. Because it cannot overcome its limits 
a crisis is generated. The crisis is the solution to the problem. But it is 
merely a provisional solution. Revolution is the authentic solution.

The state engages in an austerity programme of cuts in state spending. This 
adds to the painful nature of the crisis. It entails further hardships both for 
elements within the capitalist class, itself, and the working class. The state 
fears the deepening of the crisis for political reasons. Consequently instead 
of the crisis deepening itself to the degree necessary for a full recovery the 
state steps in to try to moderate the crisis. But this intervention fails to 
solve the problems of capitalism. It merely distorts the form by which the laws 
of capitalism manifest themselves.

The reproduction process of capital consists of the production process and the 
circulation process. It is a contradictory unity. The circulation process 
involves circulation time. It is a necessary form of the expanded reproduction 
of capital. In contrast to the production process it cannot produce value. It 
forms a barrier to the production process. Circulation is a contradiction. It 
both facilitates and hinders the valorisation process. Circulation time is 
always a barrier to the creation and realisation of value. Consequently the 
necessary tendency of capital is not only to shorten circulation time but  to 
reduce it to nothing wherever possible i.e. to  bring about circulation without 
circulation time.
Capital endeavours to overcome this barrier through credit. Valorised capital 
finds its realisation in capital’s circulation process. 

Credit emerges from the reproduction process to overcome this barrier. In other 
words the capitalist  secures credit to facilitate the fluent continuity of the 
circulation of capital. The banks are an institutional form by which this is 
achieved. However money capital cannot directly valorise itself. It is only 
capital (self expanding value) in the form of the process of production that 
achieves this. It is therefore imperative that money capital  functions within 
the circulation of capital as soon as and as little as possible. In this way 
the scale of valorisation is maximised. But there is no guarantee that this is 
always achieved. This is because of the separation of sale and purchase –the 
source of the possibility of crises.

Capital can only create surplus value within the production process. Each phase 
of production must be followed by a phase of circulation which continually  
interrupts the continuity of production. Thus the conditions of production 
arising out of the nature of  capital contradict each other. The contradiction 
is superseded and overcome in only two ways: by the division of capital and 
through credit.

Circulation time is a barrier to the creation and realisation of value. 
Consequently the necessary tendency of capital is not only to shorten 
circulation time but to reduce it  to nothing wherever possible i.e. to bring 
about circulation without circulation time.

In this context the function of money is bound up with unproductive 
expenditure. Insofar as money is value it is a cost of circulation to 
capitalist production. Money in the form of capital, money capital, cannot 
produce value. Hence capital strives to economise on money positing it as a 
merely formal moment.

The entire credit system together with the over-trading and over-speculation 
connected with it rests on the necessity of valorisation expanding and leaping 
over the barrier of circulation and the sphere of exchange. Credit is an 
inherent form of the capitalist mode of production. However it cannot create 
surplus value. It is confined to the non-valorising circulation process.  
Credit helps to keep the acts of buying and selling further apart in time and 
thereby forms the basis for speculation. It  arises out of the difficulty of 
employing capital profitably. Credit and debt exists within the framework of 
the drive for valorisation. Overproduction and the credit system are means by 
which capital  seeks to break through its own barriers and to produce over and 
above its own limits.


As capital expands it causes credit and debt to grow. In the absence of such 
credit  the economy would not grow. Its rate of expansion cannot be  
subjectively regulated. This is why the state’s relentless attempts to manage 
money never eliminate crisis, stagnation and even war. The drive to valorise 
capital cannot exist in the absence of credit and thereby debt. This is why 
valorisation historically creates credit and debt.

Credit is derived from the existence of money in the form of  means of payment. 
But the production process creates money and money capital. The circulation 
time is shortened by credit thereby rendering the valorisation of capital 
increasingly  independent of the circulation process. The greater this 
independence the greater the disconnection between the production process and 
the real market. The real market becomes increasingly independent from the  
valorisation needs of the production process itself. It is this independence 
that provides the condition for the emergence of Ponzi finance. Consequently 
there are increasingly less constraints on the degree to which production 
grows. Production becomes increasingly production for production’s sake. But 
this state of affairs cannot be indefinitely sustained. Capital cannot 
transcend its immanent limits. 

Credit becomes increasingly speculative acquiring a Ponzi character. As  Keen 
puts it the ratio of debt to GDP spirals out of control. This is just another 
way of saying that capital fails to valorise on a scale sufficient to justify 
the volume and rate of debt  expansion. In other words the production of 
surplus value fails to grow at a volume or rate commensurate with the volume of 
debt. This means that the base (let us say the GDP) on which this massive 
volume of debt rests is too small to sustain it. Eventually this debt becomes 
increasingly chimerical and thereby, in a sense,  increasingly meaningless. 
This is because it is ultimately disconnected from its source –the production 
process.  The credit system collapses and production consequently contracts. 
Investment slows down even coming to a virtual halt. Keen by suggesting that 
austerity intensifies the problem does not understand the unproductive nature 
of much of state spending.  As unproductive it is a form of expenditure that 
contributes nothing to the creation of surplus value and thereby growth. In 
fact it largely constitutes a deduction from total profit.

For Keen it is not a  question of diminishing profitability being the central 
problem.  It is debt becoming increasingly excessive and assuming a Ponzi 
character. Ponzi finance becomes unsustainable because of falling asset prices. 
But it is not falling asset prices that is the cause of the problem. It is the 
growing difficulties with valorisation. In this way Keen fetishises debt 
positing its cycle as the driver of valorisation.  

Crisis is the forcible establishment of unity between elements that have become 
independent. Although it appears in the process of circulation the crisis is an 
interruption in the process of reproduction as a whole.

Keen essentially shares the same conception as neo-classical economics, 
Austrian economics and the various forms of Keynesian economics. None of them 
see the contradiction in the capitalist mode of production as the source of the 
problem. Instead they see the product of capitalism, credit and debt etc, as 
the cause of capitalism. They see circulation as the problem. This is why they 
believe that it can be  seriously modified or changed by the state in one way 
or another such as budget deficits, quantitative easing etc. But ultimately the 
laws of capitalism cannot be managed. Ultimately they must manifest themselves 
even if in a distorted way. Capitalism, not debt, is the problem. It must be 
abolished and replaced by communism.  




Take Care
Paddy




_________________________________________________________
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to