The (post-) market [Socialism Now}

["Charles Brown" <CharlesB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

 The (post-) market [Socialism Now}
by Greg Schofield
19 November 2001 07:52 UTC



Greg,

This is great.  Not only are we in a post-modern period, but a post-market period. Not only is there an end of philosophy, ideology and history, but an end of the market. Your Leninist logic is impeccable.  The international division of labor, globalized socialization of production, is overripe for social appropriation to replace private appropriation. The central contradiction of capitalism is 11 months pregnant with socialism. However , the last leap must be conscious not just objective.

Charles

((((((((
Sorry Chris I should be clearer than this.

I am not saying that every kind of market is gone, classic markets exists
albeit on a small scale. At one point or another profits must be realisied via
exchange and that too is a market mechanism. However under classic capitalism
the whole of the economy was animated by market exchanges (as per the nature of
individual private capitals in intercourse).

Monopoly capital internalisied such market exchanges into internal
transactions, which strengthen its control over actual exchanges taking place
elsewhere. In turn this strengthened position gives such leavage over existing
markets they soon cease to exist as markets - the monopolies merely determining
the rate of exchange.

This has become so common that the real difficulty is seeing the
market-governor determining the socially necessary labour in these exchanges -
rather what we are seeing is the result of planning. The question posed by a
particular rate of exchange dwell more on the plans of the major players
(takeover as against out-sourcing, diversification as against core business,
and risk management strategies), then the displine of market buying and selling.

In a sense some of this can be seen in the consumer market where labling and
"services" almost become the commodity while the actual product seems to come a
poor second.

The other more obvious attribute is the army of accountants needed to replace
market operations, the immense amount of paper-work generated in order to keep
track of all the elements and, of course, crisis appearing as a managerial
attribute rather than direct market forces.

In this there is no turning back the clock as the neo-liberals pretend
(invariably leading to an explosion in paper-work and accountants). The chaos
of the market (its actual governance of production) is well and truely pushed
into the background - which is the essence of my point. The chaos we now enjoy
is a coporate bureacratic one.


Greg Schofield
Perth Australia