[PEN-L:28148] Re: big biz vs. big govt

[Chris Burford <cburford@xxxxxxxxxx>]

At 17/07/02 13:16 -0700, you wrote:

> Hot off the laser-printer, the
> newest edition of LEFT BUSINESS OBSERVER shows an interesting graph: in
> recent decades, the Gallup poll shows that (I assume) US citizens have
> steadily seen "big government" as the biggest threat (reaching
> about 65% a couple of years ago), with those seeing "big
> business" as the biggest threat staying at about 20%. The percentage
> seeing "big labor" as the threat has slowly declined, along
> with labor's power and influence. 
>
> What's interesting is that the percentage seeing big
> government as the biggest threat fell significantly during the last two
> years (going back to a level seen in about 1985. Simultaneously, the
> percent seeing big biz as the big threat jumped upward. 
>
> Should progressives see this as a good thing? or should we
> remember that big biz and big gummint are usually in bed together? 
>
> Jim Devine jdevine@xxxxxxx & 
> http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine


The whole label of "big" is rather populist, and US populism has done little to tame US finance capitalism. What is needed is a more socially sophisticated perspective about the complex interactions of the economy, and a greater framework of social as well as economic accountability.

Committed marxists need a dialectical approach to large finance capitalist concerns. They are not just big and bad: they are also expressions of the extremely complex social and economic systems that modern means of production generate. Marxists for example should consider calling for the regulation of Microsoft into more of a publically accountable service, rather than its breaking up because it is too "big".

Anti-monopoly laws are reforms that are essential for the continuation of consent in capitalist accumulation. We should be cautious about populism.

Chris Burford