Log in

View Full Version : Options in Novemeber



arm
14th October 2010, 22:17
The Right Vote, Vote Right.

If we’re lucky November is the beginning of the end for the Democratic Party in Washington D.C. For a number of years they have been dead weight in our goal of progress. They have dragged out the inevitable and have, over time, begun to do more harm than good in their self-righteous crusades. Capitalism cannot be subsidized, “more people moving up into the middle class,” to paraphrase Obama’s latest hope, only happens on the backs of others. In order that capitalism might be destroyed, there is only one option: for it to destroy itself. That is why I am urging all those who understand the true nature and harms of capitalism, and see its inherent flaws, to escalate this process; for it is our only option. We can begin this strategic advancement by voting and supporting the neoliberal agenda. That is: Vote Right.

I want to first begin my argument by outlining, briefly, the inherent contradictions of capitalism. I then want to touch on how certain reactions to these contradictions, focused here solely in the current political climate of the United States, attempt to alleviant their harms; however, these acts of good will have only postponed the inevitable ends of capitalism. Finally, I briefly explain the neoliberal ideology and its consequences as the best choice of action in the political economy of the United States if one’s goal is to ultimately end capitalism as a mode of production.

To begin, capitalism moves through time, always forward – looking backwards. That is, the present exists in some form of the future in relation to the past. We can see this in the everyday jargon used to talk about our economy. Debt and interest are of course the pinnacle geniuses of our current form of capitalism. Debt and interest allow for the future economy to exist in the present in some form of speculation about economic conditions that will exist due to knowledge about the past. Thus, capitalism needs an unlimited amount of resources to continue existing; however, resources are limited. Whether “resources” is understood in terms of time, humans, or oil they are not endless, and will eventually be consumed. It is at this point that capitalism collapses. At the point where the system fails to produce enough to consume, it can no longer exist.

The second inherent contradiction in capitalism is closely related to the first, as they progress in tandem. Capitalism is inherently unequal and exploitative. Stratification exists in capitalism par excellence because commodities can never be distributed equally. Therefore, our relationships are conflict based: “the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.” Those with ‘more’ can never be a substantial majority. Furthermore, those with more wealth will continue to gain more leaving an increasing number with less. This leads to an ultimate consolidation of wealth and eradicates capitalism.

These contradictions have been subverted throughout the years, at times with unmatched wit and other times by dumb luck, yet never abolished. Omnipotence can also be a weakness; now is the time to exploit the exploiter.

I now want to turn our attention to ways in which these contradictions are being subverted, or ‘subsidized’ in the current political discourse. That is, there are measures, perpetrated in false consciousness, a false sense of righteousness, that stave off these contradictions as reactions to capitalism. The examples are infinite, however, I will use two recent actions by the Obama Administration which I feel highlight this protectionism of capitalism in its current form.

First, president Obama recently signed a $42 billion “small business bill.” While the details are of little importance, the bill is a mixture of both stimulus money and tax breaks for different sectors of the world economy. This infusion of value to the ‘free-market’ by the government (a contradiction all its own) is being used to alleviate some of the pains inflicted from the current financial ‘crisis.’ The effect of such a bill only prevents capitalism, in the moment, from reaching its internal contradictions.

Rather than allowing unemployment, foreclosures, and the like to spread indefinitely, the government intervenes and patches holes in a sinking ship. Such bills avoid the limitations of capitalism by injecting money into the economy and creating more value in the future. This protectionism only postpones, or diverts the inevitable. It does not stop the system of capitalism from contradicting itself; it only evades its ultimate realization. The contradictions continue to exist. And this haphazard bandaging of the terminally ill has become the platform of the Left.

This brings me to my second example: the recent appointment of Elizabeth Warren as the “interim leader of the Consumer Protection Agency.” This installment can be seen as an attempt to mitigate the inherent exploitation of the capitalist system by ‘protecting’ those necessary for its existence.

This inverted telos cushions the systemic stratification of our relations. “The people” are given a voice of protection rather than the choice to live in a society where protection from our most primordial needs isn’t necessary. Why such a lack of choices in the land of the free? The Left has become distracted by instituting immediate and ultimate goals. A separation of our ultimate desires from our current condition only perpetuates capitalism. Capitalism is zero-sum, it cannot be defeated incrementally.

These roadblocks to the inevitable contradictions of capitalist must be removed, avoided, and ultimately destroyed if our goal is the destruction of human relations mediated by private property. As it stands, the best choice in this election year, and those to come, is to vote for those in favor of removing this interference.

I now want to outline briefly what might be called the “neoliberal” agenda as it has come together over the last 30 years. We all know it colloquially as the “free market,” laissez-faire economics, and the freedom of choice. However, I want to expound on a few of their ideas to show how their implementation or rather, the neoliberal ideology, can accelerate the inherent contradictions of capitalism.

Like any ideology - perspective matters, so it can never be positively defined. Rather, we might consider neoliberalism, often identified by the Left as stepping into the spotlight with Regan, as: “A political-economic philosophy and set of policies that established development priorities along [strict] capitalist paths of free trade, market expansion, and privatization, and free of governmental intervention and regulation and the concept of the public good."

Rather than obstructing free trade, market expansion, and the privatization of public goods we should embrace these policies politically. These policies help to increase the speed at which capitalism contradicts itself, an option that is much more attainable today than ever before. Privatization of schools, civil servants, and the like will remove the structural conditions that allow capitalism to reproduce itself. Capitalism has become so powerful because it has encompassed everything, “All else is epiphenomenal.” It should our aim then to destroy the collective, as the collective is capitalism.

The system is severely stressed. The U.S. in particular is grasping for another bubble to pull out of their current predicament. Unfortunately for the populace the nation has drained itself of resources. That is why the implementation of neoliberal politicians should be the goal of this coming election, and in any future elections. This means voting for corporate backed Tea Party candidates, Libertarians, and the far Right. Only the attempted implementation of these ideological policies can bring the ultimate collapse of capitalism.

The Left is nothing more than a hindrance today. The cushioning of the generationally poor does not prevent its reproduction. Rather, the Left should abandon itself and admit its hypocrisy.

-arm

Ele'ill
16th October 2010, 01:51
lol

Broletariat
16th October 2010, 02:42
lol
This so hard.

You didn't stumble across this Dialectically did you? I could see it now.

The opposite of supporting Communism is supporting Capitalism.
Opposites become each other or some crazy shit
Therefor lets support Capitalism to support Communism.

BuddhaInBabylon
16th October 2010, 02:51
lol. yeah, that or some crazy shit, like supporting the scum that is any of the tools in D.C.
By the by, Arm, If our only option were supporting a neoliberal agenda, i would rather sit and do nothing. That is always an option.
Why not storm the streets of DC and demand a socialist government be put into place. Just because something isn't likely doesn't mean it's less credible than capitulating to the status quo.
I'm hearing what you're saying arm, but i ain't buyin it unfortunately.

Decolonize The Left
16th October 2010, 03:01
This is an absolutely terrible idea. Your reasoning for supporting the right in electoral politics is completely illogical and dangerous.

In the first place, electoral politics is important only to the degree that it influences public policy and economic policy. The reality is that, within the US, the two main parties will dominate all political elections and hence the political framework. They effectively control the debate. Given that this is the case, they are also representatives of the economic system - the capitalist economic system. We know from Marxism that the economic system determines the political system, and hence we know that the capitalist economic system, exemplified within a large, industrialized nation, roots its politic within the main parties of said system. This is why there is little overall differences between the Republicans and Democrats in regards to long-term economic policy - i.e. the continued imposition of capital.
My point here is to demonstrate that within a certain framework, supporting some parties but not others will not lead to a solution/result outside of this framework.

In the second place, your notion that in order to hasten the collapse of an economic system we need to support of destructive elements within that system is entirely flawed. In fact, it's a recipe for disaster.
The capitalist economic system will not collapse because the far right seizes power, it will most likely maintain itself while the governmental system changes into an authoritarian regime. The far right will further curb our abilities to gather and act - thereby driving us further underground. Remember that economics determines politics, not vice-versa. Hence a change in politics will not change the economic system, it will only disenfranchise large portions of the popular (minorities, women, GLBTQ, etc...).

And finally, what you are suggesting here is supporting groups and parties for which the stated aims are to maim and destroy large portions of the US population. The Tea Party movement is highly racist and sexist, and the far right is compiled of a variety of fascists, authoritarians, and bigots. The notion that we should support these people betrays all sense of coherence and dignity. It makes us into pawns for these people as they become aware that we can be used to their ends so long as their is a 'greater evil' somewhere else.

What you are proposing here is to use the ends to justify the means, when in fact there is no end - no means. There is only the constant process of change and the individuals who will such change in one direction or another according to their values. I think you need to seriously re-consider the ideas proposed in the OP.

- August

arm
19th October 2010, 02:56
This is an absolutely terrible idea. Your reasoning for supporting the right in electoral politics is completely illogical and dangerous.

In the first place, electoral politics is important only to the degree that it influences public policy and economic policy. The reality is that, within the US, the two main parties will dominate all political elections and hence the political framework. They effectively control the debate. Given that this is the case, they are also representatives of the economic system - the capitalist economic system. We know from Marxism that the economic system determines the political system, and hence we know that the capitalist economic system, exemplified within a large, industrialized nation, roots its politic within the main parties of said system. This is why there is little overall differences between the Republicans and Democrats in regards to long-term economic policy - i.e. the continued imposition of capital.
My point here is to demonstrate that within a certain framework, supporting some parties but not others will not lead to a solution/result outside of this framework.

In the second place, your notion that in order to hasten the collapse of an economic system we need to support of destructive elements within that system is entirely flawed. In fact, it's a recipe for disaster.
The capitalist economic system will not collapse because the far right seizes power, it will most likely maintain itself while the governmental system changes into an authoritarian regime. The far right will further curb our abilities to gather and act - thereby driving us further underground. Remember that economics determines politics, not vice-versa. Hence a change in politics will not change the economic system, it will only disenfranchise large portions of the popular (minorities, women, GLBTQ, etc...).

And finally, what you are suggesting here is supporting groups and parties for which the stated aims are to maim and destroy large portions of the US population. The Tea Party movement is highly racist and sexist, and the far right is compiled of a variety of fascists, authoritarians, and bigots. The notion that we should support these people betrays all sense of coherence and dignity. It makes us into pawns for these people as they become aware that we can be used to their ends so long as their is a 'greater evil' somewhere else.

What you are proposing here is to use the ends to justify the means, when in fact there is no end - no means. There is only the constant process of change and the individuals who will such change in one direction or another according to their values. I think you need to seriously re-consider the ideas proposed in the OP.

- August

To your first point, we have no illusions to the effectiveness of participation in US politics. Rather, this technique is part of a larger call to action that is desperately needed. More often than not, those with "anti-capitalist" political leanings tend to vote Democrat in the United States in hopes of change. This has been, as we've seen with the recent administration, a grave mistake if our ultimate goal is a global destruction exploitation and a vote for the left is a vote to continually subsidize and stimulate capitalism in order to provide a "human face." This is nothing positive to come from such a perpetuation of false-consciousness

As for your second point, the disenfranchisement of large portions of the population is ALREADY HAPPENING. When is it enough? This is not about a change in politics, this about the role of politics in economics, and a uncovering a role for the individual voter. If you accept your own logic, then you have only given our position more support.

Our position is not in support of any party or group. Rather, we are interested in policies that will catalyze the contradictions of capitalism. The point is that capitalism cannot be destroyed in any other way. We cannot alleviate the pains of our commodity fetishism. It is only through its own means that capitalism will end.

And as for the "Tea Party" (we use this term to represent a overgeneralized political stance to make a point), there are two points to make. Regardless of the rhetoric of the left, the Tea Party movement is a real movement filled with real people with real emotions, desires, and ideas. The reality is (1) their voice will not be going away and therefore it should be recognized as legit, and (2) many of their concerns should be your concerns. While their message may be skewed with bigotry and ignorance, it does not discount their position, if anything it should make them prime candidates for any revolution. Their immoral and distorted views should be addressed rather than demonized.

-arm

La Peur Rouge
19th October 2010, 22:53
To your first point, we have no illusions to the effectiveness of participation in US politics. Rather, this technique is part of a larger call to action that is desperately needed. More often than not, those with "anti-capitalist" political leanings tend to vote Democrat in the United States in hopes of change. This has been, as we've seen with the recent administration, a grave mistake if our ultimate goal is a global destruction exploitation and a vote for the left is a vote to continually subsidize and stimulate capitalism in order to provide a "human face." This is nothing positive to come from such a perpetuation of false-consciousness

I don't know about you but I definitely did not vote Democrat.


As for your second point, the disenfranchisement of large portions of the population is ALREADY HAPPENING. When is it enough?

And voting for the right will only further it.


And as for the "Tea Party" (we use this term to represent a overgeneralized political stance to make a point), there are two points to make. Regardless of the rhetoric of the left, the Tea Party movement is a real movement filled with real people with real emotions, desires, and ideas. The reality is (1) their voice will not be going away and therefore it should be recognized as legit, and (2) many of their concerns should be your concerns. While their message may be skewed with bigotry and ignorance, it does not discount their position, if anything it should make them prime candidates for any revolution. Their immoral and distorted views should be addressed rather than demonized.

-arm

A real movement of real racism, real xenophobia, real nationalism, real anti-worker feelings, and a real desire to destroy anything they see as "socialist", fueled by crazies who focus these peoples' anger towards government instead of towards the real cause of crisis: capitalism.

These people will not change their views, and I certainly do not want to be part of any revolution that they support.

SocialismOrBarbarism
19th October 2010, 23:05
You seem to think that the democrats actions actually help the economy, or that they've actually taken major actions to alleviate unemployment and foreclosures. Neither are true.