[PEN-L:6174] Re: Re: Imperialist strategy for "reconstructing"theBalkans

["Charles Brown" <CharlesB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>>> Jim Devine <jdevine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 04/29/99 03:14PM >>>
At 03:12 PM 4/29/99 -0400, Charles wrote:
>Isn't this some evidence of imperialism's economic motive in this war ?
Preparation for profit creation out of destruction ? Are there any studies
of profiteering in the Marshall Plan ?

I think it's a mistake to look for the motives for a war in terms of it
unintended consequences. That is, I don't think the US/NATO thought ahead
before they started to hit Serbia with cruise missiles. Our Fearless
Leaders seem to have thought that Milosevic would simply cry "Uncle" and
the whole thing would end.

(((((((((((((((((((((

I can't tell if you are opposing the Marxist idea that capitalist wars are integral to the capitalist system; or whether you are saying that this war is an exception. I don't think the Marxist idea is that all the specific consequences of , say, WWI were intended and planned out in detail. The idea is that after it is over, they will work out the details of how to profit off of the destruction. The specific thoughts of the government officials are not the locus of explicit business motives. The general theme is as in The Communist Manifesto: although the surface reason for wars is big ideas (Make the world safe for democracy- Wilson) the main causes are based in class interests ( This war is about profits - John Reed). So , I guess I would say I think it is a mistake to ignore the growing evidence that there will be profiteering/scavengering off of the corpses of this slaughter. NPR just reported economic devastation to the Macedonian economy. This will take "investment" to re!
pair.

As we discussed once before, Hitler didn't exactly follow the optimum plan for the bourgeoisie as a whole by attacking France before the Soviet Union. The anarchy of war conduct relative to economic is not unlike the anarchy of production under capitalism. But both anarchies are integral to the system; but then it is an irrational system looked at as a whole. It is not a win-win system,even for the capitalist class. But when the going gets rough , the rough get going.

Viewing the system as a whole, war profits are not windfall profits, though they may be for some sectors of the bourgeoisie. In the case of world wars, it's a crap shoot for the most individual capitalists; but those unwilling to take risks.. you know the rap.

((((((((((((((((

Jim D.

I'm sure that there was profiteering in W. Europe after WW 2, but
businesses can profit from a lot of different situations. And often the big
profiteers were people with little or no political influence before the
policy was put into effect.

Charles: Again , I think you are being a little , what is the word, watching the trees and missing the forest. What you are describing is a sort of shakeout. There is competition within the capitalist class, and the winners are not always the ones you might expect. But capitalism as a system generated profits out of it, or restored the rate of profit ( or did it).

((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

To explain the Marshall Plan, I'd emphasize US hegemonic ambitions, the
effort to protect capitalism in Europe, the effort to control the USSR
(which had MP aid offered to it, with big strings attached),
anti-communism, etc. Corruption and profiteering were results more than
causes.

Chas.: I believe these assertions. But your implication is that before the war the motivations for the war were anti-profiteering. That the war was launched against the tendency of capitalism as a system. I don't believe the countries would have been so armed and prepared for war, including with nationalism/jingoism in the population, if the capitalists in the main were against the war. Before a specific war starts, the capitalists don't know how it will end up. But their posture is that there must be some wars to prevent international unity of the working class; and they roll the dice to try come up the winner , like the U.S., with a Marshall Plan.

Otherwise, you end up having to say that war is irrational for capitalism. Maybe this proposition you agree with. Now if we could get the capitalists to act based on it.

Are you saying that WWI and WWII were against the wills of the capitalists ? Are you saying the current war is not favored by the bourgeoisie ? Or are you saying they were neutral in those wars ? In this one ?  Do you think the bourgeoisie see the institution of war as in favor or against their overall interests ?


Charles Brown