====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
A) I would be careful not to take the exceptional period of the 'post-war boom' as the normal for capitalism. If we look at annual growth rate of GDP per capita for the world (Maddison) we see: 1820-1870 .53%; 1870-1913 1.30%; 1913-1950 .91%; 1950-1973 2.93%; 1973-1998 1.33%. So, we should really take a longer-term look at the situation. B) I would also caution against claims such as 'no major technological innovation in sight'. This is simply beyond any of us to predict and there are places where technology could advance very rapidly (ie: biotech). See Mandel on long-waves and their technological influence if you want to parcel out a longer-term history of the relationship. C) Also, don't forget the contradiction between Value and exchange-value along with exchange-value and use-value. Focusing only on the latter leads to theories that neglect production and the contradictions that arise out of the discrepancies between what/how stuff is produced and how the market allocates an exchange-value on it and the mediation process between the two that must take place. D) "We all know that the material basis for the existing relations of production are more important than ideology." More important maybe, but not solely important. As we have seen the past 40+ years, it is not simply a matter of material determination of history but it is fundamentally a political/ideological question. Brad > We all know that the material basis for the existing relations of > production are more important than ideology. > > Do you feel Capitalism has now entered a long period of stagnation ? > After all, the World GDP annual growth rate has been constantly > decreasing since the 1960s (from around 6% to the present 1 or so %). > This phenomenon has taken place despite Capitalism becoming entrenched > in China and Russia. With no major technological innovation in sight, > does this mean that ultimate break-down theories of Capitalism are > becoming more of an issue ? > > the fundamental contradiction in Capitalism stems from the contradiction > between use-value and exchange-value, but which specific mechanism > could, in the short-term, bring insurmountable contradictions to the > fore, such that the working class would become more conscious of the > necessity to alter the prevailing status quo ? > > In other words, is the present degree of exploitation of the surplus > value sufficient to enable Capitalism to expand ? And if not, will the > workers be in a position to take advantage of this fact ? > > I would really appreciate any feedback on these questions. > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > ________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
