Re: reparations

[Michael Yates <mikey+@xxxxxxxx>]

Do you think that to say,as Marx did, that capitalism gives us " a
presentiment that such productive forces slumber[...] in the breast of
social labor" that he is being ambivalent about capitalism? I don't
think this is the right word. Saying that capitalism helps to show us
the way to abundant production does not imply ambivalence.  If anything,
capitalism's absolute inability to fulfill this possibility (see Kofi
Annan's fact sheet)might well lead people, as it surely did Marx, to
oppose capitalism with one's whole being.

Michael Yates

Michael Yates

Sam Pawlett wrote:
>
> Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> > But capitalism made possible the wealth and scientific knowledge that
> > people struggled over, and the partial socialization of production
> > that made socialism possible. This ambivalent attitude towards
> > capitalism seems to me one of the distinctive features of Marxism -
> > as opposed to romantic, moralizing, or utopian critiques of the sort
> > that Marx savaged.
>
> I disagree with this reading of Marx. His ambivalent attitude towards
> capitalism was only in relation to feudalism and capitalism's ability to
> overcome feudal social relations, laying the foundation for collective
> ownership of the economy. As Louis P. has pointed out, Marx's views
> changed when he considered Russia (and the U.S.) after reading
> Chernevskii and corresponding with the People's Will. Marx came to view
> capitalism as a sufficient and not a necessary condition for socialism.
> Capitalism is only progressive in the sense that it lays the foundations
> for collective ownership but the collective ownership of socialism
> doesn't necessarily have to be built on capitalism. See the volume *Late
> Marx and the Russian Road* ed. Shanin.
>
>  If you're going to embrace a romantic, moralizing,
> > or utopian critique, you might as well say so, instead of doing it in
> > the name of a purer Marxism - purer than Marx himself.
>
> If you are going to have a critique of a social system it has to have a
> basis.
> That basis can be a moral or ethical basis e.g. socialism will maximize
> human happiness or lead to more egalitarian distribution of resources or
> allow the free development of each person. It can be economic -a
> socialist economy will be more stable and grow faster with minimal
> negative externalities.If you are a socialist and you
> don't want to criticize capitalism then you have to rely on
> Cohen-Pleknakov arguments that socialism is inevitable and that is just
> the
> way it is. Marx himself is often criticized for being romantic and
> utopian. Being romantic and utopian is ok by me , but then I'm young and
> foolish.
>
> Sam Pawlett