Paul Cockshott on Econophysics and Socialism

[Die Neue Zeit]

Good read, and comrades might know both the interviewee and the interviewer and ( ;) ): http://spiritofcontradiction.eu/rowan-duffy/2013/02/06/interview-paul-cockshott-on-econophysics-and-socialism

It includes a criticism of basic income proposals, some comments on real-time planning addressing quality control problems, and key comments on political will and organizational problems.

[Positivist]

Another interesting and informative article from Paul Cockshott. Econophysics intrigues me greatly, though I am uncertain of the validity of the premise. The premise I refer to is the one that capitalism is a system with a high degree of freedom and thus that it can be mathematically treated as such. I am a little confused as to what it means exactly. Stock markets certainly seem to operate without any discernable order, but basic market interaction seems to follow certain patterns dictated by self-interest.

[cantwealljustgetalong]

Stock markets certainly seem to operate without any discernable order, but basic market interaction seems to follow certain patterns dictated by self-interest.

Empirical data suggests that actual human behavior has very little to do with the instrumental form of rationality suggested by neoclassical choice models, which is what I assumed you meant by 'self-interest'; apparently it predicts the behavior of economists quite well, but that seems related to them studying instrumental rationality. In market exchange between 'rational' and 'non-rational' (regular) actors, outcomes of economic events are also in-themselves indeterminate via the "anarchy of the market".

Great interview, btw. I'd like to hear more about what he thinks of Kliman's analysis of the latest crisis, since it seems like they have both done unique empirical work on the subject. I really hope more folks take a serious look at econophysics and I'd like to see more of it in the Marxian mold.

[cyu]

I am uncertain of the validity of the premise. The premise I refer to is the one that capitalism is a system with a high degree of freedom

Exactly. Every property claim that is enforced by armed guards is the precise opposite of "freedom".


I think it is a mistake to attribute unemployment to automation.

This I agree with.


A decline in employment is always the direct result of a slackening of aggregate demand

I would say the goal of automation should in fact be to create 100% unemployment - but not unemployment in the sense of working-class-in-poverty unemployment, but in fact in the Mitt-Romney-I'm-unemployed-too sense. That is, if capitalists don't have to work because machines are working for them, the same should apply to the working class.

The reason automation currently causes hardship for the working class is not the automation itself, but the fact that capitalists own and control the automation / means of production rather than the working class controlling the automation / means of production.

[RedMaterialist]

Good read, and comrades might know both the interviewee and the interviewer and ( ;) ): http://spiritofcontradiction.eu/rowan-duffy/2013/02/06/interview-paul-cockshott-on-econophysics-and-socialism

It includes a criticism of basic income proposals, some comments on real-time planning addressing quality control problems, and key comments on political will and organizational problems.

Paul Cockshott is probably the leading socialist economist in the world today. However, I have to say that the term "econophysics" needs to be re-worked.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Paul Cockshott is probably the leading socialist economist in the world today.

If this is meant as a compliment then I feel it is severely mistaken at best, and at worst misleading.

A 'Socialist economist' is something of a misnomer, at least if we are talking about Marxist circles of discussion. Socialism isn't a theory of the economy; it cannot be reduced to either mere economism in practice, or economics in theory. It is a political philosophy, and is multi-dimensional as one.

Confining your work to the field of economics - as you believe Cockshott to do - may result in economic works that have impressive academic credentials (though I don't see Cockshott as a 'leading' economist nor a particularly accessible one - and if a Socialist writer isn't accessible then what's the point?), but lacking in a basic Marxian-Socialist premise.