Re: Schweickart

[Chris Burford <cburford@xxxxxxxxxx>]

There is a streak of naivety in Schweickart but I do not think the issue of
Yugoslavia is central to deciding the merits of his model. His naivety is
that he writes with scrupulous logic and goodwill about various economic
and political scenarios. I cannot help feeling his location in the Loyola
University, Chicago, is significant.

But the book Against Capitalism is extremely interesting for providing a
bridge towards socialism that does not dispense with a market, although he
admits his model would slow down the onward rush of technological innovation.

His last chapter, "Marxian Reflections" is particularly scrupulous about
where he stands in relation to Marx's writings. He draws heavily for
inspiration on Fromm's edition of the 1844 Manuscripts and sees a general
psychological shift in society as being one necessary condition for the
emergence of his model, which he calls Economic Democracy. He does not
emphasise class struggle.

"Communism already exists in embryo in capitalist societies. On this
interpretation, if one's work is challenging, satisfying and secure, and if
one does not really have to worry about paying the rent or the credit card
bills, then one is now living as one would under communism. The point is to
universalize this condition. If this can be done, we shall have a world
very different from the one we live in today."

He was profoundly influenced by reading Capital at college and regards
capitalism as a profoundly unjust economic order rooted in exploitation. He
says little about the Marxian theory of value nor about dialectical
materialism. He discusses Marx's picture of communism and says it is very
attractive and argues that his "Economic Democracy" will be a step on that
road.

However, "my account of communism is at odds with the readings of almost
all other interpreters of Marx, for according to my interpretation, *even
under communism there will be money, a market, and state*. Marx's
communism, I claim, need not be conceived of as a moneyless, marketless,
stateless society."

On the state he argues that Marx's concept of the withering away of the
state refers only to the organs of institutionalized physical coercion:
police, prisons, and the military.

"I am inclined to grant that the model Marx (very briefly) sketched in his
Critique of the Gotha Program is not that of a market economy." "I do not
give this fact much weight, because his intention there was not to think
through in any serious sense the structure of a viable socialism", but
rather to criticise erroneous formulations in the program.

Schweikart's model is one of social control over banks so that cooperatives
can apply for funds on which they pay fees, which are made available on the
social, as well as the economic, strengths of their case.

 The British National Health Service remains a very sizable economic unit,
which is not fully capitalist. If the Trusts are given more autonomy they
could be rather similar to "Economic Democracy" in a vital service sector,
health.   If the HMO's were brought under social control in the USA this
would look like Economic Democracy. [my observations]

He is in favour of national protectionism against the IMF and global
finance capital to enable a country to embark on Economic Democracy. I
doubt that is possible now.

Schweickart concludes his chapter on Marxian Reflections by emphasising the
importance of equality for women, and that this goal should not be
subordinated to the class struggle. "It has become increasingly clear that
to achieve Economic Democracy - or the liberation of women, or the end of
racism, or a sustanable environment, or world peace - we shall have to aim
at more than any one of these goals. To achieve anything, we must struggle
for everything."

A brave and thoughtful book that was swimming against the tide when first
published. Less so now.

The 8 preceding chapters are all economic.

Chris Burford

London