markusuboy
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I don’t really have anything all that intelligent to add. But I did translate an article a while back that theoretically refutes the idea of a “wage-price spiral.” (https://www.marxists.org/archive/kuruma/wages_inflation.htm)
Mattick sort of rejects the spiral, but then sort of doesn’t.I also thought his idea about raising prices was suspect. But the interviewer poses the question rather strangely at an earlier point in asking Mattick: “Doesn’t competition force companies to try to offer their products at a low price to maximize market share?” This might be a quibble but that way of phrasing things makes price seem a bit arbitrary (an idea that the interviewer criticizes later). I think the force of competition is what is behind the drive to raise productivity (which makes it possible to lower prices). A company could hardly lower prices very far unless there is some increase in labor productivity. Sometimes the term “competition” is thrown around without examning exactly what is spurred by it. Capitalist firms scramble to raise productivity because whoever manages to do it first can (for a while, at least) to sell its wares below the market price but still at or above the commodity’s indivdual value (thereby pocketing a “surplus profit”). That is also the basis for driving smaller competitors out of the market. Why raising prices (at least in a competitive market) could be a successful strategy is beyond me.
In any case, I think the biggest problem I had with interviewer and interviewee alike is a tendency to pose the question of prices as if it was some sort of conscious choice of business leaders rather than a reflection of the value of the commodities produced.
The Lafarge book has been translated into Japanese. The first edition came out in 1972 and a new edition (of the same translation) was published by Heibonsha (a large publisher) in 2008. The translator is Shinya Tabuchi (as listed in the link).
And yes (as someone working in Japan), Japanese capitalism sucks. But not sure if it is any worse than the US, where I’m from. I see similar sorts of misery in both places.
Just curious why we have a photo on the SS cover of people wrapping themselves in the Ukranian flag along with the slogan “Real freedom doesn’t have a flag”?
Considering that 9/10ths of the people on the Internet these days with that flag on their Facebook or Twitter page are begging NATO to provide more arms to the Ukranian government, it doesn’t seem like the best image to use.
And on top of that the cliched Anti-Putin banner, as if the whole war is just some crazy idea that he cooked up in a fit of depression.
Even the slogan “Stop All War” seems rather lame as we know that it there is simply no way to stop all war as long as capitalism continues. What we can do is clarify the concrete causes of this and other wars and the underlying connection to the profit system.
Thanks for your comment. As you’ll see with Part 2, the theory of crisis I present is centered on the tendency for the profit rate to fall, but it is not simply the fall in the profit rate but the string of unexpected consequences (for capital) that this unleashes. And the tendency cannot be separated from the overall examination of the (normal) accumulation process of capital. But this is also a profit squeeze theory in a way, in that the competitive struggle between capitals that heats up as the profit rate falls (and the minimum level of capital investment steadily rises), drives up demand for labor power so that wages rise, and this drives down the profit rate even further, to the point where there is an “overproduction of capital” (= some capital invested will not be able to obtain sufficient profit to continue to augment). My article has something of a critique of underconsumption because I point out how the limited consumption of workers is hardwired into the system. I also note how the process of accumulation is uneven, as certain sectors lead the way of expansion, but I did not critique crisis theories centered on disproportion. I think it is important to not be too obsessed with finding the primary cause of crisis, as if capitalism had some achilles heel. I think instead it is necessary to look at the contradictions of the normal process of capital accumulation to understand how capitalism ultimately is a barrier to itself (although it continually pushes beyond that barrier and temporarily succeeds in so doing). Anyway, maybe my view falls into the eclectic category because it combines elements of the different theories you mentioned.
Hi.
It’s Mike, the author of that article. Thanks for pointing out the old-fashioned parlance. Could Matt or whoever has the power, please change the “men” to “individuals” for me.
One other thing I noticed is that the photo used of Teinosuke Otani is not him. Although Otani also had glasses and was Asian, that’s about as far as the resemblance goes. I see that the faux Otani shows up in a Google search, so I understand why it was used, and it must be too late to replace it with his actual image, but I wanted to point it out nevertheless.
On a separate note, if anyone happens to be bemoaning the incompetent response to the pandemic by your own central government, be reassured to know that the response is equally if not far worse here in Japan. Or I should say there simply is not response, to speak of.
YfS,
Mike
Hi Theodesp,It's nice to hear from someone in Greece. I'm looking on from Japan, so am not very familiar at all with the political composition of Syriza or its ideology (nor have I read Poulantzas, unfortunately). It was clear from listening to Varoufakis that he sincerely wants to alleviate the devestating social crisis in Greece. What I objected to was the idea that this can only be done by setting aside anti-capitalism for the moment and actually attempting to rescue the bourgeoisie from its own incompetence; or what he perceives to be its incompetance, because now that he is part of the "ruling" party, he may soon find out how impervious capitalism is to rational thought. This logic of "first let's deal with these practical problems, and we can oppose capitalism later" has had devestating consequences over the past century. Whether dealing with a crisis or opposing a particular war, the activists who throw all their energy into this supposedly practical approach, leave in place the system that spawns crisis and war. And so even after the Vietnam War is brought to an end (and activists congratulate themselves on helping to end it), the next generation as the Gulf War, the Iraq War, the Afghan war (etc. etc!!). The Great Depression is later followed by our latest crisis. When are we ever going to get around to getting to the root of the problem. Must we always put it off in favor of "solving" other problems?But having said that, I fully understand the urge to "do something" in Greece and in other countries now.Mike
I've been listening to a number of interviews with the new Greek financial minister, Yanis Varoufakis. Doug Henwood has interviewed him a number of times and put together a compilation of those interviews that is interesting:http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/Radio.htmlAnd there is also a video worth watching titled "Confessions of an Erratic Marxist." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3uNIgDmqwIThe video is particularly interesting because right at the beginning he addresses the question of why he thinks it is worth rescuing capitalism from its crisis rather than welcoming its collapse (which he seems to assume is a possibility). His answer simply comes down to the idea that "the Left isn't ready for power" and that if the crisis is not remedied Europe is headed for something much worse (=fascism). So, behind all of his undeniable eloquence and erudition (and knowledge of capitalism), is a very tired reformist logic. Another interesting moment in the video (at the end of his talk, around the 50-minute mark) is an odd anecdote about how flying around the world first-class to attend meetings, he began to develop a sense of personal "entitlement" that he had to fight against. He says: "Your soul can be very easily corrupted. You can find yoursel in the position where the socialist of yesteryear, instead of changing the world, ends up changing himself."That may be a fairly acccurate prediction of where Varoufakis (a name that sounds like a marriage of truth and falsehood) may be headed. Mike (S)
Thanks for that Alan. I agree it would be nice to have articles grouped together under key topics. I will take you up on that suggestion of searching for our past articles on Money. If there is enough material, I might try to create a sort of summarizing document with links to the aritcles. (Maybe you could post it on the SOYMB blog?)But if any "political economists" out there know of a good book on monetary history, please let me know.Mike
