Paul Mason: a proper thread on his book

[ALB]

Actually, that Independent interview wasn't as bad as the advertisement for it suggested and the title was better:

Quote:

Paul Mason: The Channel 4 frebrand revolutionary reveals his formula for a 'gift' economy.

Here's an extract from Rentoul's article

Quote:

 what is interesting about Mason's book is his analysis of how information technology is going to lead to the abolition of the market – and what he calls the "supersession" of capitalism by a new form of economic organisation.

See here. So he wants to go beyond the market to a "gift economy" rather than back to barter.Whether it will come about in the way he seems to be suggesting is another matter. Be interesting to see too what he says about where the Bolshevik revolution went wrong. I'm going to buy the book today.

[imposs1904]

In light of reviews and comments about his book, Mason posted this on his Facebook timeline about an hour ago:The reviews for Postcapitalism so far:1. Neoliberalism does not exist2. This does not fit my existing way of thinking and is therefore wrong3. There are too many soviet era thinkers mentioned4. It's too anticapitalist in its language5. Paul has no right both to write things with ideas in and also be a journalist6. Lottie is OK Who's Lottie? I know he's kind of bantering with this post but there is a whiff of tetchiness about it, also. I guess he'd throw number 3 at us – and everyone else who is in any way sniffy about the book, for that matter.  

[imposs1904]

Formatting gone to shot once again.Does it just happen to me, or does other people experience formatting difficulties on the forum when they've cut and pasted something? 

[alanjjohnstone]

Used to happen to me when i drafted a reply or c and p from another source on to Abiword WP but it stopped when i changed my WP to Word 2013 (which has it own snags tho).  

[robbo203]

ALB wrote:

Actually, that Independent interview wasn't as bad as the advertisement for it suggested and the title was better:

Quote:

Paul Mason: The Channel 4 frebrand revolutionary reveals his formula for a 'gift' economy.

Here's an extract from Rentoul's article

Quote:

 what is interesting about Mason's book is his analysis of how information technology is going to lead to the abolition of the market – and what he calls the "supersession" of capitalism by a new form of economic organisation.

See here. So he wants to go beyond the market to a "gift economy" rather than back to barter.Whether it will come about in the way he seems to be suggesting is another matter. Be interesting to see too what he says about where the Bolshevik revolution went wrong. I'm going to buy the book today.

 So is Mason a proponent of some form of technological determinism  (I confess to not having read him)? I wouldnt go along with that (in response to Adam's opening post) but I could well imagine the growth of socialist conciousness interacting in a synergistic fashion with the developments in information technology to which Mason refers to expand the realm of non marketised activity.  But I cannot see such developments in themselves leading to the "supercession" of capitalism as such

[ALB]

Couldn't buy the book as its release has been postponed from 30 July to 27 August. In the meantime we'll have to rely on interviews.

[LBird]

On pages 110-111, Mason has started to discuss 'value' and the balance of the relationship between ideal and material (information/data and physical; intangible and tangible; real and "nothing real").Up until now, he has clearly been employing the familiar, but outdated, Engelsist, not Marxist, concepts of 'materialism' and the 'concrete'. I take it this dates back to his erroneous acceptance when younger, that Engels' ideas are also Marx's ideas, and so Mason accepts the myth of the mystical unity of the single thinker 'Marx-Engels'.I'm not sure where he's going with all this yet, but if I can make sense of it from a Marxist idealist-materialist perspective, I'll say some more later.For now, I'd give the advice to anyone reading the book to clarify both one's own ideology (if one is an Engelsian 'materialist', at least be open to oneself) and also Mason's own ideology.So far, he's called Marxism "Conventional Marxism" (p. 30), "Orthodox Marxism" (p. 34) and plain old "Marxism" (p. 33), but it's not clear at all what he means by these terms, or if he himself is employing a "Marxist" perspective (read "Engelsist").

[twc]

Paul Mason explains the periodic growth and contraction of the capitalist economy by Kondratieff wave theory.Kondratieff waves are named after the soviet economist who imagined a 50-year periodicity in capitalist economic activity, and who then concluded that each economic cycle reflected the advent, adoption, flourishing and demise of its age’s defining technology.Kondratieff’s waves operate on a timescale midway between the epochal transformations of social systems, based on changing class ownership and control of the social means of production, and the Marxian economics of nature-imposed social reproduction under the capitalist social system, based upon its characteristic mode of class ownership and control of the social means of production.Scientifically, one would seek to explain Kondratieff’s apparent wave phenomena in Marxian terms, i.e. in terms of the social system’s essence—capital—but such attempts have so far failed to convince (which is not surprising given how contemptuously Marx’s Capital is now treated) and this intriguing problem for Marxian theory remains unresolved.However, for the purposes of Paul Mason’s argument, capitalist society has now started to ride the information technology Kondratieff wave. For Paul Mason, information technology is the surfboard that took us out to the wave and, once we master it, it will be the surfboard that rescues us from the capitalist depths and carries us to the post-capitalist shore.Our ride will take one Kondratieff period of 50 years.  But we should not take Paul’s mathematics seriously. His absurd definition of the mathematical sine wavefunction betrays his amateurism—he really should have limited his ratios to the opposite and hypotenuse of right-angled triangles.So what characterises the Kondratieff IT wave we are now on?The IT wave has already established its essential characteristics through the emergence of free Open Source software, free creative commons internet resources, free Wikipedia collaboration, etc.The IT wave’s free goods are premised on the assumption that IT development and IT maintenance require a vanishing amount of human labour, and that consequently IT software products and IT firmware-based technology possess a vanishing marginal cost (i.e. can be replicated for everybody for free).  And IT technology will invade everything we produce.Paul’s point is that this characteristic invariant of the IT wave—free technology and its technology-based products—is totally subversive of capitalism, since the indispensable compulsion for a capitalist ruling class to withhold ownership and control of the means of production from the working class, thereby forcing the working class to work on its terms, will no longer serve its capitalist purpose once everything is free.  The means of production might just as well be owned by everyone or by no-one.That, in a nutshell, is his argument.  IT will issue us into an Age of Abundance—the necessary precondition for post-capitalism to succeed.Post-capitalism will be characterised by renewable energy, neutral carbon, zero socially necessary labour time, and zero marginal cost.So far, so good, up to a point.  Some interesting socialist (in our sense) arguments, entertainingly and intelligently told, including a good discussion of the economic calculation pseudo-problem, etc.But Paul’s argument, such as it is, is grossly tainted by anti-socialist stuff (in our sense), because it is overtly saddled with Paul’s serious acceptance of duplicitous soviet and Leninist assertions that the soviet Russian economy was in any way socialist.But much worse is to come—Paul Mason’s apology for gradualism and the reformist transitional plan…Paul wants post-capitalism to preserve the capitalist state apparatus—its legislature, its judiciary, its law enforcement coercion, its commercial banks and its market.  He wants to preserve all of the capitalist social superstructure without realising that the capitalist social superstructure is a consequence of the capitalist economic foundation—ownership and control of the means of production by the capitalist class.You’d think that if he were a consistent Marxist he’d comprehend that.But, in fact, it turns out that Paul Mason is quite consistent because, despite himself, he does want to preserve capitalist relationships of ownership and control of the means of production after all. Paul is prepared to submerge the Marxian objectivity of the social organism that is capitalism beneath the epiphenomenal subjectivity of the Kondratieff wave. 
Consequently, he offers us all sorts of wonderful reforms that have no chance of succeeding in the world of Marxian objectivity, but have every chance of succeeding in his uncomprehended phenomenal world.The only Marxian answer to Paul’s reform agenda is that, while capitalist social relationships exist, his wonderful reforms have no chance of succeeding.  Once a socialist majority consciously abolishes capitalist social relations of ownership and control of the social means production, Paul’s wonderful reform agenda becomes redundantly unnecessary and effectively meaningless.If this seems an unnecessarily harsh judgment on Paul Mason, judge for yourself from the legislation, and the prevailing social relations under which it is to be promulgated, that he wants society to pass while in its IT Kondratieff wave.Here is Paul’s list…Keep the market (oh dear, oh dear, oh dear)Only suppress market forces for energySuppress all monopolies (oh dear, the free market nirvana)Regulate the rate of profitEnforce profits to be plowed back into social justice (oh dear, “profits for social justice”)Force McDonalds to induct employees with a one-hour course in trade unionismForce McDonalds to stop dispensing promotional plastic toysForce Walmart to advise employees how to increase their wages (oh dear, what planet is he on?)Make WiFi free to break up the telco monopoliesOutlaw price fixing (except by the government)Break up Apple/Google by public ownershipCheapen the cost of basic necessities (oh dear, the capitalist’s desideratum)Produce more stuff for freeSell water, energy, housing, transport, healthcare, telecommunications and education at cost priceShrink (national and personal) debtDestroy market forcesForbid monopoly pricesEuthenase the renter (or perhaps the rentier)Reward creativity—the market will reward entrepreneurship and genius (which he utterly misconstrues as Keynes’s “animal spirits”)Reduce the time for holding patent and intellectual property rights, e.g. 25 yearsIncrease the use of creative commonsIncentivise investment in renewablesSupport local power gridsLet communities keep their efficiency gains (Oh dear, there’s “socialisation” out the window)Punish energy inefficiencyCreate cooperatives like Mondragon, who exploit with a social conscience (oh dear, exploitation is fine if your conscience is clear)Socialise the financial system (oh dear, it is nationalised below)Socialise financial rewards on the grounds that we already socialise financial risks (oh dear, what a howler)Increase the velocity of money to “tame” speculationNationalise the national central bank
Set a high inflation rate to stimulate sustainable growth (oh dear, Keynesian stimulus!)Elect bank bosses democratically, and scrutinise their financial behaviour (oh dear, this is a pure gem!)Make the state the lender of last resort, but cap its profit rates (oh dear, à la soviet Russia)Track down and suppress (just as the West did to Al-Qaeda [sic]) all off-shore tradingMake it unethical for a chartered accountant to propose a tax avoidance scheme (oh dear, laws establish ethics!)Preserve fractional reserve banking at all costs [sic]Issue fiat money to kill neoliberalism [sic]Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear!  If anyone wanted proof of the imbecility inflicted by exposure to Leninist indoctrination, it is here on display.  What an incalculable service the bolsheviks and their thuggish supporters have rendered the world’s capitalist class if one of the better survivors thinks—actually fails to think—like this!  The bolsheviks and their lickspittles must answer for world-wide social confusion.Now listen to his justification for his shopping list of social goodies.  We can do all of the above because “we” did it once before for slavery and child labour.  (Oh dear!)  Yes, “we” simply regulated slavery and child labour out of existence.  This imbecile justification is all the evidence we need that the man is intellectually crippled by his Leninist past.His noble aim is to promote the transition to an economy where many things are free, but where profit is paramount, and profit is both monetary and non-monetary—that is Paul Mason’s conception of post-capitalism.The post-capitalism of Paul Mason’s book’s title turns out to be a fantasy hybrid world of his Leninist crippled dreams.It is a confused imaginary landscape in which one happily extends the (non-functioning) carbon trading model to trade in other commodities, in which one quite happily “socialises” energy and banking, in which one simply breaks up monopolies and imposes huge constraints on public-sector outsourcing, all by legislative decree.It operates an illusory economy in which everyone is guaranteed a basic wage, in which market and behavoural information is forced to flow back from its commercial monopolisers (Amazon, Google), so that present-day information asymmetry becomes artistically symmetric.It is populated by fairy-tale personages in which the magical kiss of legislation enthuses managers, trade unions and industrial system designers to collaborate in networked modular non-linear teamwork because apparently that “can be less alienating—and deliver better results” [sic].And best of all, there’s wonderful news for the 1%.  Paul’s post-capitalism will apparently liberate the 1% female surfers in lycra who jog Bondi beach.  The “99% are coming to their rescue”.

[ALB]

Thanks. Looks as if we got a book review for next month's Socialist Standard if you don't have any objection.

[twc]

Quite happy. I imagine you’ll eventually read the book.  I did so in a single sitting, initially encouraged, but ultimately appalled when I reached the final chapter.  I assume that you'll agree with my assessment.  In any case I’m happy for you to edit and shorten my review to make it appropriate in tone and size for the Standard.  

[Young Master Smeet]

Scottish Independence and “PostCapitalism”

Quote:

Helpfully, Mason closes his book with prescriptions – which he will be happy to see “torn apart and revised by the wisdom of angry crowds” – under the title of “Project Zero”. This refers to three overall objectives:a zero-carbon energy systemthe production of machines, products and services with “zero marginal costs” (ie, too cheap and plentiful to price)and the reduction of necessary labour time as close as possible to zero

OK, broad themese, but seems a bit different to the take down desribed above.

[twc]

Socialists agree with these objectives.What socialists disagree with is that Paul Mason’s market economy, with all its attendant legislation (as listed above), is any way a post-capitalist society.  It is not the society of our Objective.

[stuartw2112]

I wonder whether it's possible for someone who doesn't agree with the party's objective to nevertheless have interesting things to say and not be a complete dupe and fool and idiot? I don't know, just wondering.

[stuartw2112]

“Some people are more certain of everything than I am of anything”http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/96a620a8-3a8d-11e5-bbd1-b37bc06f590c.html?siteedition=uk#axzz3hviIksET

[jondwhite]

deleted

[Author]

Posts