Jubilee or Debt Forgiveness

[tanklv]

Why isn't there a push for a world wide Jubilee (Debt Cancellation/Forgiveness)?

It would collapse the parasite banking class/system immediately and wipe out any advantages the rich parasites hoard over all of us.

It would also dovetail nicely with the gutting of capitalism at least as it exists now - wouldn't that be a good beginning step?

I think the world - even the US - is ripe for that right now...

[The Idler]

Because the banking system would start all over again as long as capital was still required for production.

[The Jay]

Because the banking system would start all over again as long as capital was still required for production.

That's true but wouldn't the working class come out much more "wealthy" than otherwise?

[The Idler]

That's true but wouldn't the working class come out much more "wealthy" than otherwise?
I suspect there would probably just be ruling-class "austerity measures" imposed on the working-class to bail out the ruling-class with big bonuses.

[tanklv]

I suspect there would probably just be ruling-class "austerity measures" imposed on the working-class to bail out the ruling-class with big bonuses.

That's apples and oranges.

I am not talking about transferring money from the working classes to the wealthy. You seem to be misunderstanding my point. There would be no "bailout" and no money for "bonuses" since the slate/books would be simply wiped clean - no transfer of any "wealth" at all. And no more underwriting of their lifestyles with artificial debt carried by the workers.

There are a lot more working people in debt than the plutocrats. All the working peoples' debt would be wiped out and the wealthy would be left holding the (now empty) bag.

This would not have anything to do with "austerity measures" since any such thing would no longer be necessary/required/allowed.

Homes would be free and clear. Credit card and other "debts" would be free and clear. It would be devestating for the money managers, and all their "assets" would no longer have any "value".

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

That's apples and oranges.

I am not talking about transferring money from the working classes to the wealthy. You seem to be misunderstanding my point. There would be no "bailout" and no money for "bonuses" since the slate/books would be simply wiped clean - no transfer of any "wealth" at all. And no more underwriting of their lifestyles with artificial debt carried by the workers.

There are a lot more working people in debt than the plutocrats. All the working peoples' debt would be wiped out and the wealthy would be left holding the (now empty) bag.

This would not have anything to do with "austerity measures" since any such thing would no longer be necessary/required/allowed.

Homes would be free and clear. Credit card and other "debts" would be free and clear. It would be devestating for the money managers, and all their "assets" would no longer have any "value".

They would not allow it to occur on a big scale, but likewise, it is a short and temporary measure that would not do anything about the fundamental problems of capitalism (A more equal capitalism is no more desirable than the opposite).

A socialist revolution would also do away with the same problems of debt and so on so forth, but would extend far beyond such a limited scope. Therefore it is undesirable to call for simply the recall of all already issued debt.

[tanklv]

They would not allow it to occur on a big scale, but likewise, it is a short and temporary measure that would not do anything about the fundamental problems of capitalism (A more equal capitalism is no more desirable than the opposite).

A socialist revolution would also do away with the same problems of debt and so on so forth, but would extend far beyond such a limited scope. Therefore it is undesirable to call for simply the recall of all already issued debt.

I understand what you're saying - but why does it have to be "all or nothing" - why can't we do both?

"The only way to eat an elephant is one bite at a time..."

I don't believe there wll ever be a time when, at least in the US, the people will rise up and switch to socialism, much less communism. There is too large a "middle class" and they are happy with it - they just want to make it all "fairer". (and, yes, I know how foolish this is). But that is the REALITY today. America today is nowhere in the same universe where the peasants rised-up against the ruling class - there is no "peasant class" in America. I'd bet that over 90% of the US is "middle class" and want it to stay that way...they're just arguing about how to divide it all up and make the "game's rules" more equitable.

Talk about "lumpin" and "bourgeouis" and other terms will only get you a blank stare at best, and laughed-at and ridiculed at worst...

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

I understand what you're saying - but why does it have to be "all or nothing" - why can't we do both?

"The only way to eat an elephant is one bite at a time..."

I don't believe there wll ever be a time when, at least in the US, the people will rise up and switch to socialism, much less communism. There is too large a "middle class" and they are happy with it - they just want to make it all "fairer". (and, yes, I know how foolish this is). But that is the REALITY today. America today is nowhere in the same universe where the peasants rised-up against the ruling class - there is no "peasant class" in America. I'd bet that over 90% of the US is "middle class" and want it to stay that way...they're just arguing about how to divide it all up and make the "game's rules" more equitable.

Talk about "lumpin" and "bourgeouis" and other terms will only get you a blank stare at best, and laughed-at and ridiculed at worst...

Because if there was a cancellation of all the worlds debt- it would make for a very temporary improvement, and it would do nothing to abolish what led to the problem and what is at the core of the issue. And hint: it's not greedy bankers, it's not wealthy individuals, it's the system they are a part of, and as long as the system persists, so will the bankers and exploiting classes in their whole, they are as indivisible as the head and tail of a snake.

The complacency of the U.S. proletariat is irrelevant. Peasants are not the revolutionary class, the proletariat is. The fact that there are no longer any peasants in the proper sense of the world is a sign that the U.S. is a developed capitalist economy, nothing else.

The class consciousness in the U.S. might be singularly bad - for a number of reasons, much revolving around political propagandists playing on notions of everyone-can-succeed and fomenting a strong nationalism - which is why there is such little opposition (relative to the very bad working hours and standards, wages and such), but nevertheless their efforts cannot stop the train of time. It might take a thousand years, but sooner or later, by the virtues of the inherent qualities of capitalism, it's either socialism or barbarism, or extinction.

I'm not sure why you make this digression though. In what way does this justify a narrow economic focus as opposed to a broad revolutionary struggle? The struggle must be organised, and presently there is no alternative in this field, and the results can be seen in the political confused off-shots that spawn like the heads of a hydra whenever there's a popular revolt of some kind, however fleeting. There is a will to change in many, and many suffer silently the dreadful burdens of capitalism, and this must work as a spark to ignite the bomb that will blow it all to a limbless corpse thrown on the ash-heap of history, ash-heap of history together with Reagan.

[Susurrus]

How on earth would we accomplish such a thing without just going full-steam to socialism?

[citizen of industry]

You could call for it all you want, but the ruling class would never allow it. It would wipe out a bunch of their wealth, and put the global economy into a tailspin. What they will do is implement a bunch of increasingly harsher austerity measures. You said it yourself:

It would collapse the parasite banking class/system immediately

A call for jubilee is essentially a revolutionary demand. It would take a revolution for it to happen.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Worldwide abolition of state debts may or may not a revolutionary demand, but this Jubilee proposal is.


How on earth would we accomplish such a thing without just going full-steam to socialism?

I believe this would be termed a directional demand or a transitional measure.

[ckaihatsu]

This proposed populist reformist measure serves to illustrate the inherently antagonistic and chaotic nature of the system we live in. Like the OWS movement itself it can only *beg the question* at most: Where would we draw the line?

Even those in the highest reaches of the elitist 1% would simply shrug and say, "Hey, we just happen to provide financing and liquidity at the most massive scales. Without us there'd be no international economy. And if we're not currently lending it's only because the outstanding risks are just too high right now in the current economic climate."

And those in the 99% would still require the "good" parts of a global economy -- its liquidity, the extension of credit for present-day manufacturing and job-creation, wages, etc.

Given a broad-enough worldwide proletarian struggle this measure may readily become a *milestone* on the road to full revolution, but to *call* for it as an interim step just creates more messiness and finger-pointing than is actually politically productive.

It may *seem* like revolutionaries are too black-and-white in their / our politics, but that is only because there *are* no half-measures possible, period. Only a full collective control of the world's means of mass production will resolve the myriad contradictions of class once and for all.