Is neoliberalism all about feudal agio, mercantile and usurary capital?

[el_chavista]

I found this (http://www.medialeft.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=93:-from-marx-to-goldman-sachs-the-fictions-of-fictitious-capital&catid=63:capital&Itemid=56) article by Michael Hudson, based on a presentation given at the China Academy of Sciences, School of Marxist Studies in Beijing, and I really didn't see that coming: "our brand new" neoliberalism is based on ye old interest-bearing feudal capital. Isn't this aspect of bourgeois economics totally deceptive?

[Jose Gracchus]

Oh yes, another bourgeois economist goes on a search for that "good" "productive" capital.

[el_chavista]

Oh yes, another bourgeois economist goes on a search for that "good" "productive" capital.
I don't think so. It is a thoroughly explanation of the capitalist crisis, with many quotations from Marx.

[Jose Gracchus]

What's that you say? Lotsa quotations? Well you got me there.

[Die Neue Zeit]

According to the Russian Marxist Boris Kagarlitsky, neoliberalism is the domination of trade capital over industrial capital because of the subordination of finance capital to the former (http://www.revleft.com/vb/global-crisis-russian-t148236/index.html).

[Jose Gracchus]

Thus implying we should be out searching for that "good," "more progressive" industrial capital. I pass. Yet another attempt to resurrect historically dead welfare state Keynesianism.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Hardly. In a transitional period, "socialized industrial capital" would play a bigger role. Just compare this to the state-based speculation schemes known as sovereign wealth funds, a form of "socialized finance capital" (like a publicly-owned financial services monopoly). Any form of "socialized trade capital" would have to take a backseat.