From: Patrick Bond 
Charles Brown wrote: 
CB: Generally, Marxists see "globalization" as laying the groundwork
for socialism, just as capitalist monopoly lays the groundwork in
another way. Marx conceived of Communism as a world system, a
"centralized" or holistic world economy and as retaining the One World,
One Species aspects of "capitalist globalization" . 

Patrick:
Can I try this, instead?:

Generally, Marxists see "globalization" and "imperialism" as delaying
the groundwork for socialism, 
^^^
CB: Well, no. As I just wrote, classical Marxists, which is a big
section of "Marxists in general", following the thinking of both Marx(
as in the penultimate chapter of _Capital_ Vol. I) and Lenin see
imperialism as creating a worldwide socialization of the labor,
worldwideweb of labor, which is the basis for socialism, not a delay of
socialism.

^^^


just as globalization delays the establishment of a "One World, One
Species" capitalism,

^^^
CB: That wouldn't be until socialism. Can't get that with capitalism

^^^
 thanks to uneven and combined development, which immiserises by
maintaining aspects of the non-capitalist world that are profitable for
superexploitation. 

^^^
CB: That's what we get rid of with world socialist revolution. 

It's a contradictory process ( In general, Marxists  are dialecticians)
. Socialism is a sublation or overcoming _and_ preserving of capitalism.
In some ways, capitalism prepares the way, in some ways it , of course
,prevents the way to socialism.

^^^^^

^^^


According to Marx,


   The discovery of gold and silver in America, the extirpation,
   enslavement and entombment in mines of the aboriginal population,
   the turning of Africa into a commercial warren for the hunting of
   black skins signalled the rosy dawn of the era of capitalist
   production. These idyllic proceedings are the chief momenta of
   primitive accumulation. On their heels treads the commercial war of
   the European nations, with the globe for a theatre.[1]

^^^
CB: Yes, agree wholeheartedly on the importance to colonialism and
slavery as the chief momenta of primitive accumulation of capitalism.
But the _primitive_ or the original accumulation of capital is not the
main aspect of  imperialism, the last stage of capitalism; although I
agree that there are virulent vestiges of the primitive accumulation
process in modern imperialism, as Luxemborg, you and Harvey argue. By
the way, if you check the archives of this list, you will see that I
have posted the section on colonialism and slavery as the chief momenta
of the primitive accumulation here about a dozen times. My formula is  :


Capitalism =  wage-labor x specially oppressed labor    (See the
archives)

In any case , for an update , see Lenin's _Imperialism_. And the
relevant section of Marx on capitalism's positive contribution is here:

As soon as this process of transformation has sufficiently decomposed
the old society from top to bottom, as soon as the laborers are turned
into proletarians, their means of labor into capital, as soon as the
capitalist mode of production stands on its own feet, then the further
socialization of labor and further transformation of the land and other
means of production into socially exploited and, therefore, common means
of production, as well as the further expropriation of private
proprietors, takes a new form. That which is now to be expropriated is
no longer the laborer working for himself, but the capitalist exploiting
many laborers. This expropriation is accomplished by the action of the
immanent laws of capitalistic production itself, by the centralization
of capital. One capitalist always kills many. Hand in hand with this
centralization, or this expropriation of many capitalists by few,
develop, on an ever-extending scale, the co-operative form of the
labor-process, the conscious technical application of science, the
methodical cultivation of the soil, the transformation of the
instruments of labor into instruments of labor only usable in common,
the economizing of all means of production by their use as means of
production of combined, socialized labor, the entanglement of all
peoples in the net of the world-market, and with this, the international
character of the capitalistic regime. Along with the constantly
diminishing number of the magnates of capital, who usurp and monopolize
all advantages of this process of transformation, grows the mass of
misery, oppression, slavery, degradation, exploitation; but with this
too grows the revolt of the working-class, a class always increasing in
numbers, and disciplined, united, organized by the very mechanism of the
process of capitalist production itself. The monopoly of capital becomes
a fetter upon the mode of production, which has sprung up and flourished
along with, and under it. Centralization of the means of production and
socialization of labor at last reach a point where they become
incompatible with their capitalist integument. Thus integument is burst
asunder. The knell of capitalist private property sounds. The
expropriators are expropriated. 

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch32.htm
^^^
CB: Notice: " Centralization of the means of production and
socialization of labor at last reach a point where they become
incompatible with their capitalist integument. " That is centralization
of production , which as Lenin demonstrates is monopoly, continues after
capitalism, which is in socialism.  So, does "socialization of labor"
which is worldwide socialization of labor that has developed in
imperialism, the last stage of capitalism.

^^^


Generalising upon this insight, Luxemburg observed,


   Force, fraud, oppression, looting are openly displayed without any
   attempt at concealment, and it requires an effort to discover
within
   this tangle of political violence and contests of power the stern
   laws of the economic process. Bourgeois liberal theory takes into
   account only the former aspect: ‘the realm of peaceful
competition’,
   the marvels of technology and pure commodity exchange; it separates
   it strictly from the other aspect: the realm of capital’s
blustering
   violence which is regarded as more or less incidental to foreign
   policy and quite independent of the economic sphere of capital. In
   reality, political power is nothing but a vehicle for the economic
   process. 

^^^
CB:  Sure. On the state as special repressive apparatus by which the
ruling classes dominate exploite and oppress ruled classes, including of
course in imperialist colonies,  see _The State and Revolution_ and _The
Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State_. This is the more
exact sense in which  " political power is nothing but a vehicle for the
economic
   process. "

^^^^


The conditions for the reproduction of capital provide the
   organic link between these two aspects of the accumulation of
   capital. The historical career of capitalism can only be
appreciated
   by taking them together. ‘Sweating blood and filth with every
pore
   from head to toe’ characterizes not only the birth of capital but
   also its progress in the world at every step, arid thus capitalism
   prepares its own downfall under ever more violent contortions and
   convulsions…
^^^^^
CB: Concretely, this aspect is not to the fore right now if the
reference to "violence" is to use of violence by the special repressive
apparatus, the state ( In Luxembourg and Lenin's day WWI was the
expression of the imperialist crisis that was to the foreground) The
crisis and "convulsion" right now in almost 2009 is in the "peaceful"
realm of Wall Street, in the very House of the Financial Oligarchy. That
is where imperialism's contradictions are erupting most drastically at
the moment The capitalist crisis is in finance capital not militarism.

^^^


 Militarism fulfils a quite definite function in the
   history of capital, accompanying as it does every historical phase
   of accumulation. It plays a decisive part in the first stages of
   European capitalism, in the period of the so-called ‘primitive
   accumulation’, as a means of conquering the New World and the
   spice-producing countries of India. Later, it is employed to
subject
   the modern colonies, to destroy the social organizations of
   primitive societies so that their means of production may be
   appropriated, forcibly to introduce commodity trade in countries
   where the social structure had been unfavourable to it, and to turn
   the natives into a proletariat by compelling them to work for wages
   in the colonies. It is responsible for the creation and expansion
of
   spheres of interest for European capital in non-European regions,
   for extorting railway concessions in backward countries, and for
   enforcing the claims of European capital as international lender.

^^^
CB: All very true. Bravo Red Rosa. But right now the pertinent classics
are those that examine the elementary structures and crises in the
_financial sector_, not the military, or even the colonies and
neo-colonies. There is no crisis of colonial debt repayment _right now_.
There is a crisis and _bankrutpcy_  among Biggest Banks,  the Monopoly
Creditors, the Financial Oligarchy. The Emperors themselves are naked.
The "free" market is exposed as a monopoly system, dependent on
"government" largesse, really large.  The economic objective  state's 
ends are not meeting. These objective tendencies of capitalism toward
socialism, these "immanent laws of capitalism itself" are leaping to the
fore. Ironically. it is US bourgeois politicians and media commentators
who have suddenly in the last few months  seen the return of  the
"Spectre of Socialism" in the explosions in the financial sector. And
the US government _objectively_, through the operation of an immanent
law of capitalism itself, by  nationalizing some of the biggest banks
_is_ laying the groundwork for socialism. As Engels and Marx included as
part of the preliminary program for "Marxists in general"  in _The
Manifesto of the CP_

"5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a
national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly. "

^^^


   Finally, militarism is a weapon in the competitive struggle between
   capitalist countries for areas of non-capitalist civilization.[2]


[1]. Marx, K. (1867)[2005], Das Kapital, available at
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch31.htm.

[2]. Luxemburg, R. (1968)[1923], The Accumulation of Capital, New York,
Monthly Review Press. See www.marxists.org/archive/
luxemburg/1913/accumulation-capital/, from which these citations are
drawn.





This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. 
www.surfcontrol.com
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to